Gibbons vs.

Ogden Supreme Court of the United States Congressional Commerce Regulation Decided 1824 Background: This case arose from the state of New York granting certain ferries exclusive monopolistic rights to its coasts and harbors for steamboat travel. Thomas Gibbons, a New Jersey steamboat trader with Congressional permission for coastal commerce, wanted to use New York waterways for his business. Ogden, a New York steamboat trader, filed an injunction with a New York court to keep Gibbons out of New York waters, stating that Congress has no authority over navigation issues. The state of New York then denied Gibbons access to its waterways, citing its law as enforcement. Gibbons then sued Ogden and the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case. Issue: Whether or not the commerce clause of the Constitution grants Congress the power to dictate intrastate navigation as a function of commerce. Standards: The Commerce Clause is an enumerated power given to Congress in the Constitution(Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3). The clause gives Congress the necessary power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among different states, and with Indian tribes. The Necessary and Proper Clause of the Constitution(Article 1, Section 8, Clause 18) grants Congress the power to make other laws in order to execute any other enumerated power given to Congress. Decision: The Supreme Court ruled in Gibbons favor. Chief Justice Marshall determined that Congress is given the power to regulate all aspects of commerce, not only the traffic of interstate commerce but the intercourse between trading parties, which includes navigation. Marshall stated If, as has always been understood, the sovereignty of Congress, though limited to specified objects, is plenary as to those objects, the power over commerce with foreign nations and among the several states is vested in Congress as absolutely as it would be in a single government, having in its constitution the same restrictions on the exercise of the power as are found in the Constitution of the United States. Importance: Gibbons v. Ogden set a precedent for Congress' unchallenged control of all aspects of intrastate trade. Daniel Webster described this decision as grossly overpowering. It is important to recognize that though the Supreme Court ruled to empower Congress, the Supreme Court did not declare Congress's power to regulate trade unlimited. Forty years after this decision, the Supreme Court began limiting Congressional power with the case of United States vs. E. C. Knight Co. in 1895. In the 1930's the court briefly returned to the precedent interpretation of the Commerce Clause set by Gibbons, with the 1942 Wickard v. Filburn case that found to further define Congress additional inherent powers.