Cooley v. Board of Wardens

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Cooley v. Board of Wardens" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (May 2013) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

Cooley v. Board of Wardens
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued February 9–11, 1852 Decided March 2, 1852
Full case name	Aaron B. Cooley, Plaintiff in Error v. The Board of Wardens of the Port of Philadelphia, to the use of the Society for the Relief of Distressed Pilots, their Widows and Children, Defendants
Citations	53 U.S. 299 (more) 12 How. 299; 13 L. Ed. 996
Holding
The Commerce Clause extends to laws related to pilotage. State laws related to commerce powers can be valid if Congress is silent on the matter.
Court membership
Chief Justice Roger B. Taney Associate Justices John McLean · James M. Wayne John Catron · John McKinley Peter V. Daniel · Samuel Nelson Robert C. Grier · Benjamin R. Curtis
Case opinions
Majority	Curtis, joined by Taney, Catron, Nelson, Grier
Concurrence	Daniel
Dissent	McLean, joined by Wayne
McKinley took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
Laws applied
Commerce Clause

Cooley v. Board of Wardens, 53 U.S. (12 How.) 299 (1852), was a US Supreme Court case that held that a Pennsylvania law requiring all ships entering or leaving Philadelphia to hire a local pilot did not violate the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution.^[1] Those who did not comply with the law had been required to pay a fee.

Benjamin R. Curtis wrote for the majority, "It is the opinion of a majority of the court that the mere grant to Congress of the power to regulate commerce, did not deprive the States of power to regulate pilots, and that although Congress had legislated on this subject, its legislation manifests an intention, with a single exception, not to regulate this subject, but to leave its regulation to the several states."

The legal historian Charles W. McCurdy viewed Cooley as a defining case, which clarified the Court's hitherto-contradictory jurisprudence on state powers over interstate commerce.^[1]

See also[edit]

• List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 53
• Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

References[edit]

External links[edit]

• Works related to Cooley v. Port of Philadelphia at Wikisource
• ^ Text of Cooley v. Board of Wardens, 53 U.S. (12 How.) 299 (1852) is available from: Findlaw  Google Scholar  Justia  Library of Congress  OpenJurist 
• Summary of Cooley v. Board of Wardens