explain the debate involved in gibbons v. ogden and the final decision.
http://www.oyez.org/cases/1792-1850/1824/1824_0
what does the "debate involved" mean?
"Question
Did the State of New York exercise authority in a realm reserved exclusively to Congress, namely, the regulation of interstate commerce?"
-- from the Oyez website linked above
thank you sooooooooo............... much!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You're very welcome.
The debate in the case of Gibbons v. Ogden revolved around the question of whether the state of New York had the authority to grant a monopoly privilege to a steamboat operating on a waterway between New York and New Jersey, which was also used by a federally licensed steamboat.
To understand the debate, let's first take a step back and look at the constitutional context. The United States Constitution grants the federal government the power to regulate commerce between states (known as the Commerce Clause), while also granting states the power to pass laws for the health, safety, and welfare of their citizens (known as the Police Powers). These two powers occasionally come into conflict, and it falls upon the courts to determine their boundaries.
In this case, Aaron Ogden held an exclusive license from the state of New York to operate steamboats on the Hudson River, including its navigable waters within the state's jurisdiction. Meanwhile, Thomas Gibbons had secured a federal coasting license, permitting him to operate a steamboat on the same river and between New York and New Jersey. Gibbons had obtained his license in accordance with an act of Congress that regulated the coasting trade, which included the transportation of passengers and goods between different states.
The conflict arose when Ogden sued Gibbons, seeking an injunction to stop him from operating his steamboat in New York waters, claiming it violated the exclusive privilege granted to him by the state. The case eventually reached the Supreme Court of the United States in 1824.
The justices had to consider two main questions: (1) Did Congress have the power to regulate interstate commerce in this situation, and (2) Did New York's grant of a monopoly to Ogden violate Congress's authority over interstate commerce?
In the unanimous decision, Chief Justice John Marshall, writing for the Court, held that Congress had the constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce, and that it extended to navigation. Marshall emphasized that commerce encompassed not just the buying and selling of goods but also transportation and navigation.
As for the question of state authority, the Court ruled that New York's grant of a monopoly to Ogden was invalid because it conflicted with the authority of Congress to regulate interstate commerce. The Court stated that states could not enact laws that interfered with congressional authority in matters of interstate commerce.
In essence, the decision in Gibbons v. Ogden reaffirmed the supremacy of the federal government in regulating interstate commerce, while also establishing an expansive interpretation of the Commerce Clause. It limited the power of states to regulate certain aspects of commerce that fell within the purview of Congress, establishing a precedent that has guided subsequent cases on federal-state commerce power.