KIDD v. PEARSON
Term:
- 1851-1900
Facts of the Case
A state law made the manufacture of liquor in the state illegal, even when the liquor was for sale and consumption out-of-state.
Question
Was the state law in conflict with the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce?
Conclusion
There is no conflict and the state law is valid. The Court erected a distinction between manufacture and commerce. The state law regulated manufacturing only. The justices feared that a broad view of commerce that would embrace manufacturing would also embrace the power to regulate "every branch of human industry." The distinction proved untenable but it took nearly a half-century to erase its pernicious consequences.
Cite this Page
KIDD v. PEARSON. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 27 April 2013. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1851-1900/1887/1887_779>.
KIDD v. PEARSON, The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, http://www.oyez.org/cases/1851-1900/1887/1887_779 (last visited April 27, 2013).
"KIDD v. PEARSON," The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, accessed April 27, 2013, http://www.oyez.org/cases/1851-1900/1887/1887_779.