Kidd v. Pearson
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Kidd v. Pearson | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |
||||||||||||||
| Argued April 4, 1888 Decided October 22, 1888 |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
| Holding | ||||||||||||||
| 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. | ||||||||||||||
| Court membership | ||||||||||||||
| Chief Justice: Melville Fuller Associate Justices: Samuel Freeman Miller, Stephen Johnson Field, Joseph Philo Bradley, John Marshall Harlan, Thomas Stanley Matthews, Horace Gray, Samuel Blatchford, Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus Lamar II |
||||||||||||||
| Case opinions | ||||||||||||||
| Majority by: Lamar Joined by: Miller, Field, Bradley, Harlan, Matthews, Gray, Blatchford Fuller took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. |
Kidd v. Pearson, 128 U.S. 1 (1888), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that a distinction between manufacturing and commerce meant that an Iowa law which prohibited the manufacture of alcohol (in this case for sale out-of-state) was not unconstitutional in that it did not conflict with the power of the US Congress to regulate interstate commerce.
[edit] References
[edit] See also
[edit] External links
This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.
