|
|
Shuttle Corp. v. Washington Transit Comm’n, 393 U.S. 186 (1968)
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.
Shuttle Corp. v. Washington Transit Comm’n, 393 U.S. 186 (1968)
Universal Interpretive Shuttle Corp. v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission No.19 Argued October 21-22, 1968 Decided November 25, 1968 393 U.S. 186
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
Syllabus
Respondent Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission (WMATC) sued to enjoin petitioner, a concessionaire under contract with the Secretary of the Interior, from operating "minibus" guided tours of the Mall, a park area in the center of Washington, D.C. without obtaining from WMATC a certificate of convenience and necessity. The WMATC concedes the Secretary’s substantial powers over the Mall under specific authority dating from 1898 and as part of the national park lands over which he has broad statutory jurisdiction. WMATC contends, however, that the interstate compact under which it was established to centralize responsibility over mass transit service in the Washington metropolitan area implicitly limits the Secretary’s power to contract for provision of tour services by a concessionaire uncertified by WMATC. WMATC-certified carriers furnishing mass transit and sightseeing services in Washington, including D.C. Transit System, Inc., which contends that its franchise also limits the Secretary’s power, intervened as plaintiffs. The District Court dismissed the suit, and the Court of Appeals reversed.
Held:
1. When Congress established the WMATC, it did not intend to create dual regulatory jurisdiction by divesting the Secretary of the Interior of his longstanding "exclusive charge and control" over the Mall, and the WMATC is without authority to require that petitioner obtain from it a certificate of convenience and necessity. Pp. 189-194.
2. D.C. Transit’s franchise, which protects it from competition by an uncertified bus line transporting passengers over a given route on a fixed schedule in areas under WMATC jurisdiction, does not protect it against competition from petitioner’s leisurely sightseeing service on the Mall outside WMATC jurisdiction. Pp. 194-196.
Reversed and remanded.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Shuttle Corp. v. Washington Transit Comm’n, 393 U.S. 186 (1968) in 393 U.S. 186 393 U.S. 187. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=XYLNQQIDFDBV2ZA.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Shuttle Corp. v. Washington Transit Comm’n, 393 U.S. 186 (1968), in 393 U.S. 186, page 393 U.S. 187. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=XYLNQQIDFDBV2ZA.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Shuttle Corp. v. Washington Transit Comm’n, 393 U.S. 186 (1968). cited in 1968, 393 U.S. 186, pp.393 U.S. 187. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=XYLNQQIDFDBV2ZA.
|