Unit 1 SCOTUS FRQ - McCulloch & Gibbons

In 1824, Aaron Ogden and Thomas Gibbons, steamboat operators, competed against each other as they operated their boats on the water that stretched between New York and New Jersey. Ogden had a license from New York. Gibbons, however, held a federal license issued under the 1793 federal law regulating coastal trade. Ogden filed a complaint in New York court to stop Gibbons, arguing that the New York license he held was valid. Gibbons disagreed, arguing that the Commerce Clause gave Congress the sole power over interstate commerce. Gibbons lost in the New York courts and appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court ruled that under the Supremacy Clause, the New York license was void because it conflicted with federal law. They also argued that interstate navigation fell under interstate commerce, so New York could not interfere.

Identify which constitutional clause is common to both McCulloch v. Maryland and Gibbons v. Ogden.

Based on the constitutional clause identified in part A, explain why the facts in Gibbons v. Ogden led to a similar holding to McCulloch v. Maryland.

Describe an action that New Yorkers may take to express their opinion regarding the Supreme Court’s decision in Gibbons v. Ogden.