Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Coyle v. Smith, Secretary Of State Of The State Of Oklahoma

• 1910 • 221 U.S. 559 • White Court
In the case of Coyle v. Smith, Secretary of State of Oklahoma in 1910, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Congress could not dictate to a state where its capital should be located as it was a violation of the principles underpinning federalism and states' rights. The controversy began when Oklahoma moved its state capital from Guthrie to Oklahoma City shortly after being admitted into the Union in 1907. This move violated an enabling act passed by Congress which stipulated that Guthrie would...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief White Court
Term: 1910
Docket: 941
221 U.S. 559
31 S. Ct. 688
55 L. Ed. 853
1911 U.S. LEXIS 1757
Argued: Apr 05, 1911

Coyle v. Smith, Secretary Of State Of The State Of Oklahoma

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Coyle v. Smith, Secretary of State of Oklahoma in 1910, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Congress could not dictate to a state where its capital should be located as it was a violation of the principles underpinning federalism and states' rights. The controversy began when Oklahoma moved its state capital from Guthrie to Oklahoma City shortly after being admitted into the Union in 1907. This move violated an enabling act passed by Congress which stipulated that Guthrie would remain as the capital until at least 1913. However, Justice Joseph McKenna delivered for a unanimous court stating that once a territory becomes a state and is admitted into the Union on equal footing with existing states, it gains all powers associated with sovereignty including determining location of its own seat of government.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Coyle v. Smith, Justice Edward Douglass White argued that Congress had the authority to impose conditions on a state's admission into the Union and that such conditions did not violate principles of equal footing or state sovereignty. He contended that Oklahoma’s agreement to keep its capital in Guthrie was part of its enabling act and therefore binding. According to him, this condition was not an infringement upon state rights as it didn't interfere with any fundamental attributes of statehood but merely regulated a matter which could be subject to congressional control even after admission. The majority decision, he believed, undermined Congress's power over territories and their transition into stateship by invalidating these types of agreements made during the process.

Opinion written by Justice HHLurton
Decided: May 29, 1911
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms