Source: https://www.reedsmith.com/en/perspectives/2017/09/south-dakota-supreme-court-strikes-down-kill-quill-law
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 02:16:02+00:00

Document:
Just two weeks after holding oral argument, the South Dakota Supreme Court issued its decision in South Dakota v. Wayfair, et al., striking down South Dakota’s “kill-Quill” law. South Dakota’s law would have imposed sales tax collection and remittance obligations on out-of-state retailers. The state is expected to file a petition for a writ of certiorari with the United States Supreme Court.
Today, the South Dakota Supreme Court published its opinion in South Dakota v. Wayfair¸ holding that SB 106—imposing sales tax collection and remittance obligations on out-of-state retailers—violates the dormant Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution.1 The court held that the United States Supreme Court’s decisions in National Bellas Hess v. Illinois2 and Quill Corp. v. North Dakota3 commanded such a result. Those decisions, issued in 1967 and 1992, respectively, require retailers to be “physically present” in a state in order to have an obligation to collect and remit sales and use tax on sales to in-state customers.
What’s Next? The court’s decision is unsurprising, given that SB 106 directly conflicted with the United States Supreme Court precedent. The state has until December 12, 2017, to file its anticipated cert petition (although an extension to file may be granted). We expect numerous amicus curiae briefs to be filed on behalf of both the state and the out-of-state retailers.
State of South Dakota v. Wayfair Inc., Overstock.com Inc. & Newegg, Inc., 2017 S.D. 56 (2017) (hereinafter “South Dakota v. Wayfair”).
South Dakota v. Wayfair, 2017 S.D. 56 at ¶ 18 (quoting Rodriguez de Quijas v. Shearson/American Exp., Inc., 490 U.S. 477, 484 (1989).

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.