Gibbons vs. Ogden

In 1824 the idea of a United States of America was still very new. Perhaps the most important issue facing the nation was the relationship between the power of individual states and the federal government. While the most dramatic conflict between state and federal power would play itself out in the American Civil War, several Supreme Court decisions—including Gibbons vs. Ogden—slowly eroded power claims of individual states. Chief Justice John Marshall, the famous leader of the Supreme Court who established judicial review of congressional laws, was active at controlling the attempt by states to assert too much power.

At first glance, the case of Gibbons vs. Ogden seems like a simple dispute between two freewheeling steamboat operators at the advent of the U.S. Industrial Revolution. Steamboat commerce between New York and New Jersey was a major source of transportation and development in the early years of the 19th century. Aaron Ogden had bought a monopoly in the steamboat route that the State of New York had granted to Robert Fulton and Robert Livingston. Odgen, the plaintiff, brought a lawsuit against a rival Thomas Gibbons who had built a competing boat service between New York and New Jersey, seemingly violating the monopoly agreement granted by New York. Aaron Ogden initially won his case but the decision was appealed to the Supreme Court. Quoting Article 1, section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, which reads that Congress has the power “to regulate Commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes,” Chief Justice John Marshall concluded that the New York Monopoly violated the power of the U.S. Congress to regulate interstate commerce, commerce “among the several States.”

The precedent set by Gibbons vs. Ogden has led to several important Supreme Court decisions regarding environmental policy set by individual states. Significant among these are elements of the Clean Water Act, which gives authority over wetlands to federal regulators and the Army Corps of Engineers. Dredging and filling of wetlands, under Section 404 of that Act, is restricted, except where permitted and only where the loss of wetlands is mitigated. The legal authority of the federal government here is an extension of the diverse notions that stream flows are interstate, that migratory wetland birds move between states, and that waterways, even those isolated from major rivers, are navigable. This interpretation of the Commerce Clause stemming from Gibbons v. Ogden has not gone undisputed in recent years, with some arguing it is an overgenerous reading of the Constitution. Nevertheless, this reading stands as a cornerstone of contemporary environmental protections in the United States.