Aaron Ogden was granted the right to operate his steamboat service without any competition. Aaron Ogden filed a complaint in the Court of Chancery of New York asking the court to restrain Thomas Gibbons from operating on the waters of Ogden's route between Elizabethtown, New Jersey and New York City. Gibbons asserted that the Act of Congress superseded the exclusive privilege granted by the state of New York. Case Origin. Marshall declared that Gibbon's federal license allowed him to operate his steamboat ferry service, due to the fact that the federal government oversees interstate commerce and has supreme authority over New York's monopoly law. Federal power to regulate interstate commerce. Spell. Ruby Ross added Gibbons v. Ogden to Jerffersonian Era Board APUSH ID's. Gibbons v. Ogden. Significance: using the Commerce clause, the supreme court ruled in favor of gibbons granting more power to the federal government, an issue that will lead to the civil war . Gibbons v. Ogden. New York had granted Ogden a legal exclusive franchise, and anyone who wanted to operate a steam-powered vessel in New York harbor, with landing rights in New York City, would have to pay him for the right. Commerce clause found that the New York state law was inferior to the clause the Federal gov was designated the power to regulate interstate commerce.

Terms in this set (3) Case Issue.
Learn vocabulary, terms, and more with flashcards, games, and other study tools. In a unanimous decision that referenced the Supremacy Clause, the Supreme Court found in favor of Gibbons. Gravity. Aaron Ogden filed a complaint in the Court of Chancery of New York asking the court to restrain Thomas Gibbons from operating on the waters of Ogden's route between Elizabethtown, New Jersey and New York City. STUDY. Actions. In a unanimous decision, the Court ruled that where state and federal laws on interstate commerce conflict, federal laws are superior. Aaron Ogden was granted the right to operate his steamboat service without any competition. PLAY. Gibbons appealed to the US Supreme Court when New York's state court found in Ogden's favor.

Ogden was granted the injunction and Gibbons appealed, asserting that his steamships were licensed under the Act of Congress entitled "An act for enrolling and licensing ships and vessels to be employed in the coasting trade and fisheries, and for regulating the same." Gibbons was given permission from the United States Congress, in contrast, Ogden received a license under state law.

Federal power to regulate interstate commerce.

Gibbons was sued by Ogden for violating the monopoly given to him. Match. 1 (1824), was a landmark decision in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the power to regulate interstate commerce, granted to Congress by the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, encompassed the power to regulate navigation. The case was argued by some of America's most admired and capable attorneys at the time. Thomas Gibbons ran a competing service and had a license to sail under the federal Coasting License Act of 1793. Start studying Gibbons v. Ogden Briefing Case. aclem214. Why was the commerce clause so important? Created by. Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. (9 Wheat.)
What were Ogden's arguments? New York's effort did not interfere with the National Government's effort to regulate commerce. Gibbons v. Ogden Case Brief. Learn. Statement of the facts: Both Gibbons (Plaintiff) and Ogden (Defendant) operated steamboats in New York in an effort to regulate coastal trade. Write. Gibbons v. Ogden is a 1824 landmark case of the Supreme Court of the United States, which gave Congress complete power in regulating interstate commerce.The case questioned whether or not the State of New York could regulate interstate commerce - typically Congress’ right. Flashcards. Test. Any work or movement across state lines or from foreign countries. Federal government superior to states.He held that it was a legitimate exercise of congressional power regulating interstate commerce, and therefore superseded the state law allowing the monopoly. Ruby Ross changed description of Gibbons v. Ogden. The Federal and State governments had concurrent power over commerce.