1. Gibbons v. Ogden-(shipping cas) (NY contracted out with one steamboat company to operate between NY and NJ  & another one got in on the action.  Gibbons (the other one) was licensed under a federal statute.)(1st major case construing the commerce clause)

i.  This case discusses Commerce clause as a limitation upon state power.  However, its primary emphasis pertains to the broad sweeping view of congressional power.

ii.  Marshall-injunction against Gibbons invalid.  It was based on a monopoly that conflicted with the federal statute.  This violates the Supremacy clause.  Marshall took broad view of Congressional power.

iii.  Marshall said that congressional authority to regulate interstate commerce occurred as long as the ability to affect matters within a state as long as the activity had a connection w/ another state.  Therefore, if NY voyages were to end in NJ, federal law could affect the NY voyages.

iv.  M consented that purely internal commerce of a state may be reserved for that state.

v.  M-rejects 10th amendment argument of states that the amndmnt. acts as a limit on Congress’ power to regulate interstate Commerce.

i.  R – Things are governed by foreign commerce the minute they are put on the dock.  Congress has power to grant coasting license, granting the right to go up and down the coast.  Congress can govern waterways in between states.