Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
These included the Emergency Banking Act which authorized the President to prohibit international gold payments, Executive Order 6102 which required the surrender of all privately held monetary gold in exchange for currency, and the Gold Clause Resolution (Pub. Res. 73–10) which voided all gold clauses within the United States. The following ...
Houston East & West Texas Railway Co. v. United States, 234 U.S. 342 (1914), also known as the Shreveport Rate Case, was a decision of the United States Supreme Court expanding the power of the Commerce Clause of the Constitution of the United States. Justice Hughes's majority opinion stated that the federal government's power to regulate ...
The Court held that Illinois had violated the Commerce Clause by placing a direct burden on interstate commerce. Under the Commerce Clause only Congress had the power to do so and states could only place indirect burdens on commerce. Court membership; Chief Justice Morrison Waite Associate Justices Samuel F. Miller · Stephen J. Field
North American Co. v. Securities and Exchange Commission, 327 U.S. 686 (1946), is a United States Supreme Court case holding that a Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) order under the Public Utility Holding Company Act (PUHCA) directing a public utility holding company to divest its securities of all companies except for one electric company did not violate the Commerce Clause or the ...
In the Consolidated Gold Clause Cases (independently known as Perry v. U.S., U.S. v. Bankers Trust Co., Norman v. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co., Nortz v. U.S.), the Gold Reserve Act was subject to scrutiny by the United States Supreme Court, which narrowly upheld Roosevelt's gold confiscation policy. The 1962 case United States v.
George W. Bush & Sons Co. v. Malloy, 267 U.S. 317 (1925), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held that the state statute under which the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) issued certificates of public convenience and necessity to common carriers engaged in interstate commerce violated the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution.
Navajo Freight Lines, Inc., 359 U.S. 520 (1959), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the Illinois law requiring trucks to have unique mudguards was unconstitutional under the Commerce clause.
Exxon Corp. v. Governor of Maryland, 437 U.S. 117 (1978), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States upheld a Maryland law prohibiting oil producers and refiners from operating service stations within its borders. [1] The challengers, including Exxon, claimed that the law violated the Dormant Commerce Clause.