Gibbons v. Ogden

Media Items
Case Basics
Petitioner: 
Gibbons
Respondent: 
Ogden
Opinion: 
22 U.S. 1 (1824)
Categories: 
supremacy clause, tenth amendment, contract clause, federalism, commerce clause
Location No location information present.

Cite this page
The Oyez Project, Gibbons v. Ogden , 22 U.S. 1 (1824)
available at: (http://oyez.org/cases/1792-1850/1824/1824_0)
Facts of the Case: 

A New York state law gave two individuals the exclusive right to operate steamboats on waters within state jurisdiction. Laws like this one were duplicated elsewhere which led to friction as some states would require foreign (out-of-state) boats to pay substantial fees for navigation privileges. In this case a steamboat owner who did business between New York and New Jersey challenged the monopoly that New York had granted, which forced him to obtain a special operating permit from the state to navigate on its waters.

Question: 

Did the State of New York exercise authority in a realm reserved exclusively to Congress, namely, the regulation of interstate commerce?

Conclusion: 

The Court found that New York's licensing requirement for out-of-state operators was inconsistent with a congressional act regulating the coasting trade. The New York law was invalid by virtue of the Supremacy Clause. In his opinion, Chief Justice Marshall developed a clear definition of the word commerce, which included navigation on interstate waterways. He also gave meaning to the phrase "among the several states" in the Commerce Clause. Marshall's was one of the earliest and most influential opinions concerning this important clause. He concluded that regulation of navigation by steamboat operators and others for purposes of conducting interstate commerce was a power reserved to and exercised by the Congress.

Decisions

Decision: 6 votes for Gibbons, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: US Const. Art 1, Section 8, Clause 3; Act of February 1793, Section 1, Clause 8

Sort by Ideology

Wrote the majority opinion
Marshall
Voted with the majority
Washington
Wrote a special concurrence
Johnson
Voted with the majority
Todd
Voted with the majority
Duvall
Voted with the majority
Story

Full Opinion by Justice John Marshall

Timeplots Affiliate

Timeplots.com: A Visual History of the Supreme Court