Willson v. Black-Bird Creek Marsh Co.

1829 United States Supreme Court case
Willson v. Black-Bird Creek Marsh Co.
Decided January, 1829
Full case nameThomas Willson and Others, Plaintiffs in Error v. The Black Bird Creek Marsh Company, Defendants
Citations27 U.S. 245 (more)
2 Pet. 245; 7 L. Ed. 412
Holding
As long as Congress has not exercised its power over commerce in a certain area, a state may regulate that area as long as such regulations do not conflict with the Dormant Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
Court membership
Chief Justice
John Marshall
Associate Justices
Bushrod Washington · William Johnson
Gabriel Duvall · Joseph Story
Smith Thompson
Case opinion
MajorityMarshall, joined by unanimous
Laws applied
Commerce Clause

Willson v. Black-Bird Creek Marsh Co., 27 U.S. (2 Pet.) 245 (1829),[1] was a significant United States Supreme Court case regarding the definition of the Commerce Clause in Article 1 sec. 8, cl. 3 of the U.S. Constitution.

Background

Willson, the owner of a sloop who was licensed under federal navigation laws, the Sally, broke through a dam that blocked his passage which was built by the Black-Bird Creek Marsh Co. and had been authorized to do so by Delaware law. The company brought a case against Willson, claiming Delaware authorized the building of the dam on the Blackbird Creek through a law which was passed under the police power of the state in order to clean up a health hazard and there was no legislation by Congress dealing with the same subject matter. Willson claimed that the law authorizing the building of the dam was a violation of the commerce clause. He believed he had a constitutional right to navigating coastal streams and Delaware's actions were motivated by private profits.

Opinion

Chief Justice John Marshall affirmed the lower court's decision, that because no federal law dealt specifically with the situation, and the state law did not violate Congress' Dormant Commerce Clause power, the state law was valid. He did note, however, that the dam might interfere with interstate commerce.[2]

See also

References

  1. ^ Willson v. Black-Bird Creek Marsh Co., 27 U.S. (2 Pet.) 245 (1829).
  2. ^ Gillman, Graber, and Whittington 2013, p. 223.

Bibliography

  • Jean Edward Smith, John Marshall: Definer Of A Nation, New York: Henry Holt & Company, 1996.
  • Gillman, Howard, Graber, Mark, and Keith Whittington, American Constitutionalism, New York: Oxford University Press, 2013.

External links

  • Works related to Willson v. Black Bird Creek Marsh Company at Wikisource
  • Text of Willson v. Black-Bird Creek Marsh Co., 27 U.S. (2 Pet.) 245 (1829) is available from: Justia  Library of Congress  OpenJurist 
  • v
  • t
  • e
U.S. Supreme Court Article I case law
Enumeration Clause of Section II
Qualifications Clauses of Sections II and III
Elections Clause of Section IV
Origination Clause of Section VII
Presentment Clause of Section VII
Commerce Clause of Section VIII
Dormant Commerce Clause
Others
Coinage Clause of Section VIII
Legal Tender Cases
Copyright Act of 1790
Patent Act of 1793
Patent infringement case law
Patentability case law
Copyright Act of 1831
Copyright Act of 1870
Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890
International Copyright Act of 1891
Copyright Act of 1909
Patent misuse case law
Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914
Lanham Act
Copyright Act of 1976
Other copyright cases
Other patent cases
Other trademark cases
Habeas corpus Suspension Clause of Section IX
No Bills of Attainder or Ex post facto Laws Clause of Section IX
Contract Clause of Section X
Legal Tender Cases
Others
Compact Clause of Section X


Stub icon

This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

  • v
  • t
  • e