Gibbons appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, contending that he was protected by terms of a federal license to engage in coasting trade. A thorough summary of case facts, issues, relevant constitutional provisions/statutes/precedents, arguments for each side, decision, and case impact. Today, Marshall’s is regarded as the most influential opinions concerning this key clause.​, The Supreme Court Case of Gibbons v. Ogden. 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. Gibbons v. Ogden is a 1824 landmark case of the Supreme Court of the United States, which gave Congress complete power in regulating interstate commerce. The Gibbons decision clarified some of these issues. The decision confirmed that the Commerce Clause of the Constitution granted Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce, including the commercial use of navigable waterways.

Our latest podcast episode features popular TED speaker Mara Mintzer.

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. Ogden's lawyer contended that states often passed laws on issues regarding interstate matters and that states should have fully concurrent power with Congress on matters concerning interstate commerce. Former New Jersey Gov. Was New York State law inconsistent with Congress patent law? In 1808[3] the Legislature of the State of New

York granted to Robert R. Livingston and Robert Fulton exclusive navigation privileges of all the waters within the jurisdiction of that State, with boats moved by fire or steam, for a term of thirty years. Gibbons v. Ogden, (1824), U.S. Supreme Court case establishing the principle that states cannot, by legislative enactment, interfere with the power of Congress to regulate commerce. This page was last edited on 30 October 2020, at 23:41. It will also give you access to hundreds of additional resources and Supreme Court case summaries! As a result, Gibbons appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States. Congress had the right to regulate interstate commerce. [1][2] The case was argued by some of America's most admired and capable attorneys at the time. 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. "Contesting Commerce: Gibbons v. Ogden, Steam Power, and Social Change," in Journal of Supreme Court History 34 (March 2008), 55-73. This case explores the legal concepts of federalism, national supremacy, and the Commerce Clause. Encyclopaedia Britannica's editors oversee subject areas in which they have extensive knowledge, whether from years of experience gained by working on that content or via study for an advanced degree.... Be on the lookout for your Britannica newsletter to get trusted stories delivered right to your inbox. The glossary compiles all of the important vocab terms from case materials. A.L.A. The decision of the Court of Chancery was upheld by the court of last resort in the State of New York. The site has been made possible in part by a major grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities: Exploring the human endeavor. Site Designed by DC Web Designers, a Washington DC web design company. This act demonstrates the opinion of Congress that steamboats may be enrolled and licensed, in common with vessels using sails. By signing up for this email, you are agreeing to news, offers, and information from Encyclopaedia Britannica.

if(document.getElementsByClassName("reference").length==0) if(document.getElementById('Footnotes')!==null) document.getElementById('Footnotes') = 'none'; Ballotpedia features 318,782 encyclopedic articles written and curated by our professional staff of editors, writers, and researchers. This state-sanctioned steamboat company granted Aaron Ogden a license to operate steamboats between Elizabethtown Point in New Jersey and New York City. got a makeover! Antecedentes de Mejora Regulatoria en México David Balfre, Tijdbalk: De middeleeuwen; belangrijkste gebeurtenissen, verschijnselen, personen en ontwikkelingen, Last 10 presidents of the U.S (Before Obama), The First 10 Disney Movies that were ever made, Linea del Tiempo sobre la Evolución de la Economia, linea del tiempo historia de las matematicas, Generaciones de los Lenguajes de Programación. What Does that Law Have to Do with Interstate Commerce?

Gibbons appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing as he did in New York that the monopoly conflicted with federal law. One of these men was Aaron Ogden, who was permitted to navigate from New Jersey to New York. Exiled Irish patriot Thomas Addis Emmet and Thomas J. Oakley represented Ogden, while U.S. Attorney General William Wirt and Daniel Webster argued for Gibbons. The part of the ruling which stated that any license granted under the Federal Coasting Act of 1793 takes precedence over any similar license granted by a state is also in the spirit of the Supremacy Clause, although the Court did not specifically cite this clause. After losing twice in New York courts, Gibbons appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. Thompson took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. 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. In a unanimous decision that referenced the Supremacy Clause, the Supreme Court found in favor of Gibbons.[1].
Ogden’s competitor, Thomas Gibbons, already held a federally granted license to operate those waters. They are, of course, entitled to the same privileges, and can no more be restrained from navigating waters, and entering ports which are free to such vessels, than if they were wafted on their voyage by the agency of winds, instead of being propelled by the agency of fire. Chief Justice Marshall, speaking for a unanimous Court
Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. (9 Wheat.)

[5] The partners ended up in the New York Court of Errors, which granted a permanent injunction against Gibbons in 1820.

The case of Gibbons v. Ogden, decided by the U.S. Supreme Courtin 1824, was a major step in the expansion of the power of the federal governmentto … It set a precedent that Congress had the power to overturn state regulations if interstate commerce were involved. Los antecedentes del Desarrollo Sustentable. Omissions? Congress was debating a bill to provide a federal survey of roads and canals. Ogden argued that the license granted to him by the New York monopoly was valid and enforceable even though he operated his boats on shared, interstate waters. The decision of the Supreme Court was written and delivered by America’s fourth Chief Justice John Marshall. Date of the Delivery of the Verdict: March 2nd, 1824. student versions of the activities in .PDF and Word formats, how to differentiate and adapt the materials. Ogden filed a complaint in the New York Court of Errors seeking to stop Gibbons from operating his boats. Aaron Ogden held a license under this monopoly to operate steamboats between New Jersey and New York. The decision confirmed that the Commerce Clause of the Constitution granted Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce, including the commercial use of navigable waterways. In interpreting the power of Congress as to commerce "among the several states": Defining how far the power of Congress extends: Thomas H. Cox.

[2], Supreme Court of the United States – March 2, 1824. Hadar Katsman's US History Timeline: Chapters 1-3. The dismantling of navigational monopolies in New York and Louisiana, in particular, facilitated the settlement of the American West. After losing twice in New York courts, Gibbons appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Gibbons disagreed arguing that the U.S. Constitution gave Congress the sole power over interstate commerce.

... (date approximate) Apr 1, 1819.

Statement of the facts: Both Gibbons (Plaintiff) and Ogden (Defendant) operated steamboats in New York in an effort to regulate coastal trade. Period: Jan 1, 1770 to Jan 1, 1830. The case of Gibbons v. Ogden , decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1824, was a major step in the expansion of the power of the federal government to deal with challenges to U.S. domestic policy . ", "If, as has always been understood, the sovereignty of Congress, though limited to specified objects, is planetary 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.". In the Constitution, the framers included the Commerce Clause in the Constitution to address this problem. [3] Southerners, in particular, were growing more sensitive to what the resolution of these issues would mean to them as sectional disputes, especially over slavery, were increasing. The decision was an important development in interpretation of the commerce clause of the Constitution, and it freed all navigation of monopoly control.

List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 22, public domain material from this U.S government document, Water and Bureaucracy: Origins of the Federal Responsibility for Water Resources, 1787-1838, The History of Large Federal Dams: Planning, Design, and Construction in the Era of Big Dams, "A Century of Lawmaking for a New Nation: U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates, 1774 - 1875",, Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License, Appeal from the Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors of the State of New York. Complete the activities for the first and second days (including homework). We apologize for any inconvenience, but hope that having only one Street Law account to remember will make your life easier.