Clark Distilling Co. v. Western Maryland Railway Co
Clark Distilling Co. v. Western Maryland Railway Co. is a significant Supreme Court case that addressed the interplay between federal regulation and state laws regarding the sale and shipment of alcoholic beverages. Central to the case is the Webb-Kenyon Act of 1913, legislation designed to assist states in enforcing Prohibition laws by prohibiting the interstate shipment of intoxicating liquors into states that had banned such sales. The Supreme Court, in a 7-2 decision, upheld the validity of this act, affirming Congress's authority to regulate interstate commerce in ways that align with state laws. Justice Edward D. White articulated that the law was uniformly applicable across the nation and did not infringe upon the commerce power constitutionally granted to the states. This ruling underscored the federal government's role during the Prohibition era, reflecting the complex relationship between state interests and federal oversight in regulating alcohol. The case remains an important reference point in discussions about the limits of federal power and states' rights.
Clark Distilling Co. v. Western Maryland Railway Co.
Date: January 8, 1917
Citation: 242 U.S. 311
Issue: Commerce clause
Significance: The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Webb-Kenyon Act of 1913, forbidding the shipment of alcoholic beverages into a state in violation of its laws.
The Webb-Kenyon Act, passed in 1913 over President William H. Taft’s veto, assisted the Prohibition states in enforcing their laws against the sale or shipment of intoxicating liquors to customers within their borders. By a 7-2 vote, the Supreme Court upheld the law, recognizing that Congress had broad discretion in choosing how to regulate interstate commerce. Speaking for the Court, Justice Edward D. White argued that the law applied uniformly throughout the nation and that it did not delegate the commerce power to the states.