Willson v. Black-Bird Creek Marsh Co. facts for kids
Quick facts for kids Willson v. Black-Bird Creek Marsh Co. |
|
|---|---|
|
|
| Decided January, 1829 | |
| Full case name | Thomas Willson and Others, Plaintiffs in Error v. The Black Bird Creek Marsh Company, Defendants |
| Citations | 27 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 | |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Marshall, joined by unanimous |
| Laws applied | |
| Commerce Clause | |
Willson v. Black-Bird Creek Marsh Co. was an important case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1829. This case helped explain the meaning of the Commerce Clause in the U.S. Constitution. The Commerce Clause gives the U.S. Congress the power to control trade between states and with other countries.
Contents
What Was This Case About?
This case was about a conflict between a boat owner and a company that built a dam. The dam blocked a creek in Delaware. The Supreme Court had to decide if a state law allowing the dam was valid. They looked at whether it interfered with federal power over trade.
The Story of the Dam
A man named Willson owned a type of boat called a sloop. His boat, named the Sally, was allowed to travel under federal navigation laws. However, a company called Black-Bird Creek Marsh Co. built a dam across the Blackbird Creek. This dam blocked Willson's boat.
The state of Delaware had given the company permission to build this dam. The company said the dam was built to clean up the creek. They claimed it helped with health issues in the area. They also argued that the U.S. Congress had not passed any laws about this specific creek.
Willson broke through the dam because it blocked his way. The company then sued him. Willson argued that the Delaware law allowing the dam was against the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. He believed he had a right to use coastal waterways. He also thought Delaware's actions were mostly for the company's private gain.
The Supreme Court's Decision
The Supreme Court had to decide if Delaware's law was allowed. They considered if it went against the power of the U.S. Congress.
Chief Justice John Marshall's View
Chief Justice John Marshall led the Supreme Court at that time. He agreed with the lower court's decision. He said that since Congress had not made a specific federal law about this situation, the state law was valid.
He explained that the state law did not violate Congress's power over trade. This power is sometimes called the Dormant Commerce Clause. This means that even if Congress hasn't acted, states usually can't pass laws that unfairly block trade between states. However, in this case, the Court found the dam was allowed.
Chief Justice Marshall did point out one important thing. He noted that the dam might cause problems for trade between states. But because Congress had not passed a law on this specific issue, the state's action was allowed.
