Court Opinion

ID: 9733406
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 17:06:44.209852+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:26:40.457080
License: Public Domain

PEDERSON, Surrogate Justice,
dissenting.
Because I perceive that economic subsidies for an industry, for a synthetic fuels plant, for an airline company, for a depressed locality, and for a domestic insurance company are non-invidious discrimina-tions, I need no help from expert economists in the form of articulated purposes to conclude that there is a legitimate state purpose in exempting local companies from the insurance premium tax.
I would reverse the district court’s determination that Section 26-01-11(1), NDCC is unconstitutional and thereby afford the United States Supreme Court an opportunity to reconsider the error it has made.