Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)

1) Link to the Actual Opinion
Read the U.S. Reports opinion (PDF)

2) Summary of the Opinion
New York granted an exclusive steamboat monopoly to operate in its waters. The Supreme Court ruled that the federal government’s power under the Commerce Clause trumped the state-granted monopoly.

3) Why It Mattered
The decision gave a broad interpretation of “commerce among the states” and affirmed that Congress has the final say over interstate commerce.

4) What It Provided or Took Away

• Provided: Congress broad authority to regulate interstate trade.
• Took Away: States’ ability to block or monopolize markets in ways that interfere with interstate commerce.

5) Overreach or Proper Role?
It was a robust reading of the Commerce Clause, but squarely rooted in constitutional text and the need for a unified national market.

6) Plain-English Impact Today
If an activity substantially affects trade between states, Congress can regulate it — from transportation to modern industries like telecommunications and environmental regulation.

• Commerce Clause
• Federal Supremacy
• Interstate Trade
• Foundational