Gibbons Vs Ogden Case Study

Words: 611
Pages: 3

The Gibbons v. Ogden Supreme Court case was a case that discussed whether the State or the National Government controls state to state commerce. The outcome of the Gibbons v Ogden case was entirely justified because of the Commerce Clause of the Constitution, supporting Congress' right to control and regulate state to state trade. The case between began in around 1815 when former New Jersey Governor Aaron Ogden purchased a Fulton-Livingston license which allowed him to set up a steamboat route which was a monopoly between Robert Livingston and Robert Fulton. The monopoly of Livingston- Fulton began in 1808 when the New York legislature granted them a Monopoly of the use of steamships on waterways. Fulton and Livingston then sold their licenses to try and harm their competition. In 1815, Aaron Ogden and Thomas Gibbons …show more content…
Ogden became furious claiming that he had bought the Fulton-Livingston license and Gibbons didn't. Gibbons rebuttaled and said that he had a license from a 1793 act of Congress. Ogden took Gibbons to the New York Court of Errors. The court ruled in 1820 that Gibbons' actions were poor. Gibbons' lawyer then claimed that the New York court of Errors was not the appropriate court to handle the situation, and it was brought to the Supreme Court. The case began discussion in the Supreme Court on Wednesday February 4th 1824. The Gibbons v Ogden case was brought to the Supreme Court because the argument involved both State and National Government issues. If Ogden's steamboat license was state issues but Gibbons' issues from the National Government, there was so definitive way for the State to make a proper decision. Gibbons' lawyer's actions brought the case to the Supreme Court in 1824, and it was a very smart move for him. Even though the New York court ruled against Gibbons, the Supreme Court ruled against