A state tax law is challenged as violating both the federal Equal Protection Clause and the state's own Equal Protection provision. How should the United States Supreme Court dispose of the case if it is presented with this federal question?

• A. Review the federal issue and apply federal law regardless of state grounds.
• B. Reverse as to the federal question and remand to allow the state court to review under the state constitution.
• C. Decline to review because the decision rests on co-extensive interpretation of both constitutions.
• D. Dismiss for lack of a substantial federal question.

Answer: (B)

The key idea is how the Supreme Court handles a case that raises a federal constitutional claim plus a state constitutional claim. When a federal question is properly presented, the Court has jurisdiction to decide that federal issue. If the state decision rests on both federal and state grounds, the Court typically resolves the federal question and then leaves the state-ground claim to be reviewed under the state constitution. This respects federal supremacy on the federal issue while allowing the state courts to determine whether the state constitution provides equal or greater protection.

So, the Court would reverse as to the federal Equal Protection issue, because the federal standard governs, and then remand to the state courts to consider the claim under the state Equal Protection provision. The state court can apply its own constitution, which might offer broader protections, without this interfering with the federal ruling. The other options aren’t as accurate: a pure application of federal law regardless of state grounds would skip the state-constitutional layer, which is inappropriate when a state claim is also present; declining review or dismissing for lack of a substantial federal question isn’t warranted because a federal question exists; and arguing the issue is co-extensive and thus not reviewable misstates the Court’s ability to decide the federal issue and remand for the state issue.