Champion v. Ames (1903) - Revision history

Admin: Admin moved page Champion v. Ames to Champion v. Ames (1903)

2019-10-18T08:39:00Z

Admin moved page Champion v. Ames to Champion v. Ames (1903)

Admin at 04:03, 18 July 2018

2018-07-18T04:03:06Z

Admin at 00:40, 3 July 2018

2018-07-03T00:40:52Z

Morgannoel18 at 07:53, 22 October 2017

2017-10-22T07:53:34Z

Admin at 15:33, 28 September 2017

2017-09-28T15:33:05Z

Nicole: Created page with "In ''Champion v. Ames'' (1903), the U.S. Supreme Court sustained a federal statute that made it illegal to transport lottery tickets in interstate commerce. Speaking for the f..."

2017-01-23T21:41:01Z

Created page with "In ''Champion v. Ames'' (1903), the U.S. Supreme Court sustained a federal statute that made it illegal to transport lottery tickets in interstate commerce. Speaking for the f..."

New page

In ''Champion v. Ames'' (1903), the U.S. Supreme Court sustained a federal statute that made it illegal to transport lottery tickets in interstate commerce. Speaking for the five-member majority, Justice John Marshall Harlan claimed that Congress “may . . . exclude from commerce among the states any article . . . it may choose.” The Tenth Amendment, according to Harlan, was not a limit on Congress’s Commerce Clause power to exclude goods from shipment in interstate commerce, a power “expressly delegated to Congress.” Speaking for the dissenters, Chief Justice Melville W. Fuller disagreed and expressed their fear of creating “a centralized government” if the Tenth Amendment did not serve as an effective limit on Congress’s power.

In later cases, the Court upheld the power of Congress to enact the Pure Food and Drug Act (''Hipolite Egg Company v. United States'' 1911), and the Mann Act (''Hoke v. United States'' 1913)—both of which banned the shipment of noxious goods in interstate commerce—but denied congressional authority to ban the shipment of goods made by child labor (''Hammer v. Dagenhart'' 1918).

==== Ellis Katz ====

SEE ALSO: [[Commerce among the States]]; [[Hammer v. Dagenhart]]; [[Hipolite Egg Company v. United States]]; [[Tenth Amendment]]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-In ''Champion v. Ames'' (1903), the [[Supreme Court of the United States|U.S. Supreme Court]] sustained a federal statute that made it illegal to transport lottery tickets in interstate commerce. Speaking for the five-member majority, Justice [[Harlan, John Marshall|John Marshall Harlan]] claimed that Congress “may . . . exclude from commerce among the states any article . . . it may choose.” The [[Tenth Amendment]], according to Harlan, was not a limit on Congress’s Commerce Clause power to exclude goods from shipment in interstate commerce, a power “expressly delegated to Congress.” Speaking for the dissenters, Chief Justice Melville W. Fuller disagreed and expressed their fear of creating “a centralized government” if the Tenth Amendment did not serve as an effective limit on Congress’s power.
+In ''Champion v. Ames'' (1903), the [[Supreme Court of the United States|U.S. Supreme Court]] sustained a federal statute that made it illegal to transport lottery tickets in interstate [[Commerce among the States|commerce]]. Speaking for the five-member majority, Justice [[Harlan, John Marshall|John Marshall Harlan]] claimed that [[U.S. Congress|Congress]] “may . . . exclude from commerce among the states any article . . . it may choose.” The [[Tenth Amendment]], according to Harlan, was not a limit on Congress’s Commerce Clause power to exclude goods from shipment in interstate commerce, a power “expressly delegated to Congress.” Speaking for the dissenters, Chief Justice Melville W. Fuller disagreed and expressed their fear of creating “a centralized government” if the Tenth Amendment did not serve as an effective limit on Congress’s power.
-In later cases, the Court upheld the power of Congress to enact the Pure Food and Drug Act (''Hipolite Egg Company v. United States'' 1911), and the Mann Act (''Hoke v. United States'' 1913)—both of which banned the shipment of noxious goods in interstate commerce—but denied congressional authority to ban the shipment of goods made by child labor (''Hammer v. Dagenhart'' 1918).
+In later cases, the Court upheld the power of Congress to enact the Pure Food and Drug Act (''[[Hipolite Egg Company v. United States]]'' 1911), and the Mann Act (''Hoke v. United States'' 1913)—both of which banned the shipment of noxious goods in interstate commerce—but denied congressional authority to ban the shipment of goods made by child labor (''[[Hammer v. Dagenhart]]'' 1918).
 ==== Ellis Katz ====

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:40, 3 July 2018
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	In ''Champion v. Ames'' (1903), the U.S. Supreme Court sustained a federal statute that made it illegal to transport lottery tickets in interstate commerce. Speaking for the five-member majority, Justice John Marshall Harlan claimed that Congress “may . . . exclude from commerce among the states any article . . . it may choose.” The Tenth Amendment, according to Harlan, was not a limit on Congress’s Commerce Clause power to exclude goods from shipment in interstate commerce, a power “expressly delegated to Congress.” Speaking for the dissenters, Chief Justice Melville W. Fuller disagreed and expressed their fear of creating “a centralized government” if the Tenth Amendment did not serve as an effective limit on Congress’s power.	+	In ''Champion v. Ames'' (1903), the [[Supreme Court of the United States\|U.S. Supreme Court]] sustained a federal statute that made it illegal to transport lottery tickets in interstate commerce. Speaking for the five-member majority, Justice [[Harlan, John Marshall\|John Marshall Harlan]] claimed that Congress “may . . . exclude from commerce among the states any article . . . it may choose.” The [[Tenth Amendment]], according to Harlan, was not a limit on Congress’s Commerce Clause power to exclude goods from shipment in interstate commerce, a power “expressly delegated to Congress.” Speaking for the dissenters, Chief Justice Melville W. Fuller disagreed and expressed their fear of creating “a centralized government” if the Tenth Amendment did not serve as an effective limit on Congress’s power.

	In later cases, the Court upheld the power of Congress to enact the Pure Food and Drug Act (''Hipolite Egg Company v. United States'' 1911), and the Mann Act (''Hoke v. United States'' 1913)—both of which banned the shipment of noxious goods in interstate commerce—but denied congressional authority to ban the shipment of goods made by child labor (''Hammer v. Dagenhart'' 1918).		In later cases, the Court upheld the power of Congress to enact the Pure Food and Drug Act (''Hipolite Egg Company v. United States'' 1911), and the Mann Act (''Hoke v. United States'' 1913)—both of which banned the shipment of noxious goods in interstate commerce—but denied congressional authority to ban the shipment of goods made by child labor (''Hammer v. Dagenhart'' 1918).

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:33, 28 September 2017
Line 6:		Line 6:

	SEE ALSO: [[Commerce among the States]]; [[Hammer v. Dagenhart]]; [[Hipolite Egg Company v. United States]]; [[Tenth Amendment]]		SEE ALSO: [[Commerce among the States]]; [[Hammer v. Dagenhart]]; [[Hipolite Egg Company v. United States]]; [[Tenth Amendment]]
		+
		+	[[Category:Supreme Court Cases]]

← Older revision	Revision as of 08:39, 18 October 2019
(No difference)

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 ==== Ellis Katz ====
 SEE ALSO: [[Commerce among the States]]; [[Hammer v. Dagenhart]]; [[Hipolite Egg Company v. United States]]; [[Tenth Amendment]]
 [[Category:Supreme Court Cases]]