GIBBONS V. OGDEN

GIBBONS V. OGDEN

Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 1, 6 L. Ed.
23, was a landmark decision of the Supreme
Court that defined the scope of power given to
Congress pursuant to the COMMERCE CLAUSE of
the Constitution.
In 1800, the state of New York enacted a
statute that gave ROBERT LIVINGSTON and
Robert Fulton a monopoly—an exclusive
right—to have their steamboats operate on the
state waterways. Aaron Ogden owned a steam-
boat company and had received a license from
Livingston and Fulton to conduct a business
between ports in New York City and New Jersey.
Ogden had formerly been in business with
Thomas Gibbons, who started his own
steamship company that operated between New
York and New Jersey, in direct competition with
Ogden.
Ogden brought an action to enjoin Gibbons
from continuing to run his steamships, which
were licensed in the coastal trade under a 1793
act of Congress. The state courts granted Ogden
the INJUNCTION, and the case was brought on
appeal to the Supreme Court.
DANIEL WEBSTER, the attorney for Gibbons,
argued that the issuance of the injunction was
wrongful since the laws that authorized the
MONOPOLY were enacted in violation of the
Commerce Clause of the Constitution. This
clause gave Congress, not the states, the power to
regulate commerce among the states. The term
commerce included not only buying and selling
but also navigation necessary to bring about
such transactions.
In the majority opinion drafted by Chief
Justice JOHN MARSHALL, the Court agreed with
this definition of commerce and then reasoned
that since Congress was vested with the power to
regulate commerce, there could be no infringe-
ment of this power other than that specified in
the Constitution. States cannot act in this area
without express permission of Congress. The
actions of New York State were an unauthorized
interference with the power of Congress to reg-
ulate commerce, and therefore, the Court
reversed the decree of the state court and dis-