Gibbons v. Ogden Decision

This Supreme Court decision forbade states from enacting any laws or legislation that would interfere with Congress's right to regulate commerce among the separate states. Chief Justice John Marshall’s Court ruled that Congress has the power to "regulate commerce" and that Federal law takes precedence over state laws. 

Robert Fulton’s 1807 invention of the steamboat was highly significant; but its application would have been severely limited had the Supreme Court not ruled against the monopoly in interstate steamboat operation in Gibbons v. Ogden.

The State of New York passed a law giving Robert Fulton and Robert Livingston a monopoly on steamboat traffic on the Hudson Bay, "navigating all boats that might be propelled by steam, on all waters within the territory, or jurisdiction of the State, for the term of twenty years." Fulton and Livingston issued permits and seized boats that operated without their endorsement.

Aaron Ogden had a license from the State of New York to navigate between New York City and the New Jersey Shore. Ogden found himself competing with Thomas Gibbons, who had been given permission to use the waterways by the Federal Government. After the State of New York denied Gibbons access to the Hudson Bay, he sued Ogden.

The case went to the Supreme Court, and Chief Justice Marshall's opinion carried out the clear original intent of the Constitution to have Congress, not the states, regulate interstate commerce. Marshall’s decision sustained the nationalist definition of Federal power and ruled that Congress could constitutionally regulate many activities that affected interstate commerce.

In the wake of this decision, the Federal Government, empowered by the Constitution’s commerce clause, increasingly exercised its authority by legislation and judicial decision over the whole range of the nation’s economic life.

Transcript

[top right] 489.

Tuesday Morning March 2nd 1824 -

Pursuant to adjournment the Court met this morning at the Capitol.

Present - 
The Honorable John Marshall Chief Justice
Bushrod Washington
Wililam Johnson
The Honorable: Thomas Todd associate
Gabriel Duvall Justices
Joseph Story &
Smith Thompson

Proclamation being made the Court is opened

Thomas Gibbons
vs
Aaron Ogden

The cause came on to be heard on the Transcript of the Record of the Court for the trial of Impeachments and correction of Errors of the State of New York, and was argued by counsel, on consideration whereof this court is of opinion that the several licenses to the Steam Boats The Stoudinger and The Bellona to carry on the coasting trade which are set up by the appellant Thomas Gibbons in his answer to the Bill of the appellee Aaron Ogden filed in the Court of Chancery for the State of New York, which were granted under an act of Congress passed in pursuance of the Constitution of the United States gave full authority to these vessels to navigate the waters of the United [States]

---

490

Tuesday March 2nd 1824 - Contd

States by steam or otherwise for the purpose of carrying on the coasting trade any law of the State of New York to the contrary notwithstanding; and that so much of the several laws of the State of New York as prohibits vessels licensed according to the laws of the United States from navigating the waters of New York by means of fire or steam is repugnant to the Constitution and void. This court is therefore of opinion that the decree of the court of the State of new York for the trial of impeachment and the correction of errors, affirming the decree of the chancellor of that State, which perpetually enjoins the said Thomas Gibbons the appellant from navigating the waters from the State of New York with the Steam boats The Stoudinger and The Bellona by steam or fire is erroneous and ought be reversed, and the same is hereby reversed and annulled: And this Court doth further direct order of decree, that the Bill of the said Aaron Ogden be dismissed and the same is hereby dismissed accordingly. - 

[horizontal line to indicate new case]

Thomas Tenant
vs
The Proceeds of the Ships
Monte Allegre + Cargo

This cause was further argued by Mr. Meredith for the plaintiff and by W. Hoffman for the defendant.-

Ex parte Charles Wood and Gilbert Bundage - Rule for the District Judge of the Southern District of New York to show cause why a mandamus should not issue + c. - 
[horizontal line]

Proclamation being made the court is adjourned until tomorrow morning at eleven Oclock. -