Passenger Cases and the Supreme Court
The Passenger Cases, notably Smith v. Turner and Norris v. Boston, emerged from the Supreme Court's examination of state taxation on incoming passengers, including foreign nationals. In a close 5-4 decision, the Court deemed these state taxes to be unconstitutional under the premise that they constituted direct regulation of interstate commerce. This ruling sparked considerable debate, as the justices expressed starkly differing views on the implications for federalism and individual rights, particularly regarding the concept of people as commodities within commerce. Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney, in his dissent, emphasized the fundamental right of citizens to travel freely across the nation without impediments. The cases are significant not only for their direct legal outcomes but also for the insight they provide into the broader societal tensions of the time, including issues related to slavery and immigration. Ultimately, the Passenger Cases highlight the complex interplay between state authority and federal regulation in the context of both commerce and personal freedoms.
Passenger Cases and the Supreme Court
Date: February 7, 1849
Citation: 7 How. (48 U.S.) 283
Issues: Interstate commerce; right to travel
Significance: The Supreme Court banned taxes levied by states on incoming passengers, holding that such taxes directly regulated interstate commerce.
Smith v. Turner and Norris v. Boston, together known as the Passenger Cases, involved New York and Massachusetts taxes on inbound passengers, including citizens of other countries. By a 5-4 vote, a badly divided Supreme Court held that state taxes on alien passengers were direct regulations of interstate commerce and therefore void. Amid the confusion of eight separate opinions, the judges appeared to have decided that people were articles of commerce. The opinions demonstrated how strongly the justices disagreed concerning issues of slavery and federalism. In his dissent, Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney wrote an influential statement about the right of citizens to travel throughout the country “without interruption.”
