|
|
Ziffrin, Inc. v. Reeves, 308 U.S. 132 (1939)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Ziffrin, Inc. v. Reeves, 308 U.S. 132 (1939)
Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 308 U.S. 106, click here.
Ziffrin, Inc. v. Reeves No. 8 Argued October 12, 1939 Decided November 13, 1939 308 U.S. 132
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
Syllabus
1. In the exercise of its power over the manufacture, distribution, and sale of intoxicating liquors, a State may confine the business of transporting them within the State to those who are licensed as common carriers, and may enforce this by penalty and confiscation. P. 138.
2. The state power to prohibit absolutely includes the lesser power to permit manufacture, sale, transportation or possession subject to prescribed conditions which are not unreasonable and which subserve the policy of confining the liquor traffic in order to minimize its evils and to secure payment of revenue. P. 138.
3. Provisions of the Kentucky Alcohol Beverage Control Act forbidding the carriage of intoxicating liquors by carriers other than licensed common carriers and forbidding distillers to deliver to an unauthorized carrier are not invalid under the Commerce Clause, or under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, nor inconsistent with the Federal Motor Carrier Act of 1935, as applied to a contract carrier in an established business of transporting such liquors, produced in Kentucky, to consignees in other States. Pp. 138, 140.
4. The State may decline to consider certain noxious things legitimate articles of commerce, and inhibit their transportation. Property rights in intoxicants depend on state laws, and cease if the liquor becomes contraband. P. 140.
5. Although regulation by a State may impose some burden on interstate commerce, this is permissible when "an inseparable incident of the exercise of a legislative authority, which, under the Constitution, has been left to the states." P. 141.
24 F.Supp. 924 affirmed.
Appeal from a decree of a District Court of three judges denying an injunction and dismissing the bill in a suit to restrain public officials in Kentucky from enforcing against the appellant certain provisions of the state Liquor Control Law. The case was heard below on plaintiff’s application for a preliminary injunction, and defendants’ motions to dissolve a temporary restraining order and to dismiss the amended bill of complaint.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Ziffrin, Inc. v. Reeves, 308 U.S. 132 (1939) in 308 U.S. 132 308 U.S. 133. Original Sources, accessed November 22, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=U42IWV2RBPPD9SP.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Ziffrin, Inc. v. Reeves, 308 U.S. 132 (1939), in 308 U.S. 132, page 308 U.S. 133. Original Sources. 22 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=U42IWV2RBPPD9SP.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Ziffrin, Inc. v. Reeves, 308 U.S. 132 (1939). cited in 1939, 308 U.S. 132, pp.308 U.S. 133. Original Sources, retrieved 22 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=U42IWV2RBPPD9SP.
|