What was a result of gibbons v. ogden?
|
The case originated in a dispute over shipping monopolies in New York. Ogden and Gibbons both were in the business of steamboat operations between New York and New Jersey. Ogden had a monopoly from the state of New York over steamboat operations in state waters, but Gibbons had a federal license to operate within New York. After a New York court granted an injunction against Gibbons, Gibbons appealed up to the Supreme Court which found that Congress had the ability to regulate the shipping under the commerce clause and therefore superior to the state’s regulations. The case involved many historical figures of business and law including Cornelius Vanderbilt and Daniel Webster.
Show The court decided in this case that the commerce clause allows Congress to regulate not only interstate commerce but also intrastate commerce (commerce within a state) that substantially impacts interstate commerce. This decision in Gibbons v. Ogden set the foundation for later cases such as The dispute in Gibbons concerned competing claims of rival steamship franchises. The state of New York gave Aaron Ogden an exclusive license to operate steamboat ferries between New Jersey and New York City on the Hudson River. Thomas Gibbons, another steamboat operator, ran two ferries along the same route. Ogden sought an injunction against Gibbons in a New York state court, claiming that the state had given him exclusive rights to operate the route. In response, Gibbons claimed he had the right to operate on the route pursuant to a 1793 act of Congress regulating coastal commerce. The New York court found for Ogden and ordered Gibbons to cease operating his steamships; on appeal, the New York Supreme Court affirmed the order. Gibbons appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which reviewed the case in 1824. Chief Justice John Marshall ruled for Gibbons, holding that New York's exclusive grant to Ogden violated the federal licensing act of 1793. In reaching its decision, the Court interpreted the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution for the first time. The clause reads that "Congress shall have power to regulate commerce ... among the several States." According to the Court, the word "commerce" included not just articles in interstate trade but also the "intercourse" among the states, including navigation. Next, the Court examined the clause's phrase "commerce among the several States," concluding that the word "among" means "intermingled with." Accordingly, Congress' power to regulate interstate commerce does not "stop at the external boundary line of each State, but may be introduced into the interior." In other words, Congress may pass any law that regulates commerce, so long as that commerce is not wholly confined within a single state, and its power to regulate such commerce is plenary. Under this interpretation of the Commerce Clause, Congress' clearly had the authority to regulate the commercial steamboat route between New York and New Jersey. It was assumed that the licensing act of 1793 did this and that the New York law in question was in conflict with it. Thus, the New York law was unconstitutional and New York's injunction against Gibbons was overturned. Gibbons was free to operate his steamships. Gibbons v. Ogden set the stage for future expansion of congressional power over commercial activity and a vast range of other activities once thought to come within the jurisdiction of the states. After Gibbons, Congress had preemptive authority over the states to regulate any aspect of commerce crossing state lines. Thus, any state law regulating in-state commercial activities (e.g., workers' minimum wages in an in-state factory) could potentially be overturned by Congress if that activity was somehow connected to interstate commerce (e.g., that factory's goods were sold across state lines). Indeed, more than any other case, Ogden set the stage for the federal government's overwhelming growth in power into the 20th century. LandmarkCases.org got a makeover! As part of this update, all LandmarkCases.org accounts have been taken out of service. To access "Answers & Differentiation Ideas," users must now use a Street Law Store account. If you don’t have one already, it’s free and easy to sign up. It will also give you access to hundreds of additional resources and Supreme Court case summaries! We apologize for any inconvenience, but hope that having only one Street Law account to remember will make your life easier. You can reach us at [email protected] with any questions 
Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) States' Rights, Commerce Clause The Cases
“Few things were better known, than the immediate causes which led to the adoption of the present constitution ... that the prevailing motive was to regulate commerce; to rescue it from the embarrassing and destructive consequences, resulting from the legislation of so many different States, and to place it under the protection of a uniform law.” Chief Justice Marshall, speaking for a unanimous Court This case explores the legal concepts of federalism, national supremacy, and the Commerce Clause. In 1808, the government of New York granted a steamboat company a monopoly to operate its boats on the state’s waters, which included bodies of water that stretched between states. Aaron Ogden held a license under this monopoly to operate steamboats between New Jersey and New York. Thomas Gibbons, another steamboat operator, competed with Aaron Ogden on this same route but held a federal coasting license issued by an act of Congress. Ogden filed a complaint in New York court to stop Gibbons from operating his boats, claiming that the monopoly granted by New York was legal even though he operated on shared, interstate waters. Gibbons disagreed arguing that the U.S. Constitution gave Congress the sole power over interstate commerce. After losing twice in New York courts, Gibbons appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court determined that the Commerce Clause of the Constitution grants the federal government the power to determine how interstate commerce is conducted. This section is for students. Use the links below to download classroom-ready .PDFs of case resources and activities.About the Case Full Case SummariesA thorough summary of case facts, issues, relevant constitutional provisions/statutes/precedents, arguments for each side, decision, and case impact.
Case Background and VocabularyImportant background information and related vocabulary terms.
Visuals
Decision
The Case
After the Case
This section is for teachers.Use the links below to access:
(Learn more about Street Law's commitment and approach to quality curriculum.) About the Case
Learning Activities The Case
After the Case
Teacher Resources Teaching Strategies Used
Landmark Cases GlossaryThe LandmarkCases.org glossary compiles all of the important vocab terms from case materials. It is provided as a view-only Google Sheet. What was the outcome of the Gibbons v Ogden case quizlet?In a unanimous decision, the Court ruled that where state and federal laws on interstate commerce conflict, federal laws are superior.
What was the impact of the Gibbons v Ogden case?Gibbons v. Ogden set the stage for future expansion of congressional power over commercial activity and a vast range of other activities once thought to come within the jurisdiction of the states. After Gibbons, Congress had preemptive authority over the states to regulate any aspect of commerce crossing state lines.
What was the significance of Gibbons v Ogden quizlet?Significance: This ruling provided the federal government with the ability to regulate interstate commerce.
|
