Commerce Clause, Hipolite Egg Co. v. United States
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 16, 2024, 11:34:38 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  Constitution and Law (Moderator: Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.)
  Commerce Clause, Hipolite Egg Co. v. United States
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: The ruling was...
#1
Constitutionally sound
 
#2
Constitutionally unsound
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 2

Author Topic: Commerce Clause, Hipolite Egg Co. v. United States  (Read 8179 times)
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: November 12, 2005, 01:02:55 PM »
« edited: November 12, 2005, 01:45:14 PM by A18 »

Hipolite Egg Co. v. United States, 220 U.S. 45 (1911)

The Court upheld the Pure Food and Drug Act as not exceeding Congress's power to regulate interstate commerce.
Logged
Emsworth
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,054


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: November 12, 2005, 01:55:30 PM »

The decision was sound.

The relevant section of the Pure Food and Drug Act prohibited the transportation of impure foods across state lines, for the purpose of sale. Undoubtedly, such transportation constitutes a part of commerce among the states, and is therefore subject to congressional regulation. The Act also provided that any food transported across state lines in violation of the law would be forfeited to the federal government. 

The impure eggs involved in this case were transported from Missouri to Illinois, where they were seized by the federal government. It is true that, when the eggs were seized, they had already come to rest in Illinois, and all interstate commerce involving them had already ceased. How, then, could the government proceed to seize them?

It is important not to confuse regulations of interstate commerce with punishments for disobeying those regulations. The regulation here was that impure foods should not be transported across state lines. The punishment was that illegally transported foods should be forfeited. The seizure of the eggs was not regulation, but only punishment. Thus, even if they had already come to rest within Illinois, they were still subject to seizure and forfeiture.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.21 seconds with 14 queries.