Kidd v. Pearson

SCOTUSCase
Litigants=Kidd v. Pearson
ArgueDate=April 4
ArgueYear=1888
DecideDate=October 22
DecideYear=1888
FullName=J. S. Kidd v. I. E. Pearson
USVol=128
USPage=1
Citation=9 S. Ct. 6; 32 L. Ed. 346; 1888 U.S. LEXIS 2193
Prior=Error to the Supreme Court of the State of Iowa
Subsequent=None
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.
SCOTUS=1888-1889
Majority=Lamar
JoinMajority=Miller, Field, Bradley, Harlan, Matthews, Gray, Blatchford
NotParticipating=Fuller
LawsApplied=

"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.

ee also

*List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 128
*Commerce Clause

References

Further reading

* cite journal | last = Fedora | first = H. Appleton | authorlink = | coauthors = | year = 1940 | month = | title = The Commerce Clause, the State's Police Power and Intoxicating Liquors | journal = Kentucky Law Journal | volume = 29 | issue = | pages = 66 | id = | url = | accessdate = | quote =

External links

* [http://www.oyez.org/cases/1851-1900/1887/1887_779/ Oyez]
* [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?friend=nytimes&court=us&vol=128&invol=1 Findlaw]