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

Darnell v. Edwards Et Al., Constituting The Mississippi Railroad Commission

• 1916 • 244 U.S. 564 • White Court
In the case of Darnell v. Edwards et al., constituting the Mississippi Railroad Commission, 1916, the U.S. Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a state law that required railroads to provide separate but equal accommodations for black and white passengers violated the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The plaintiff, Darnell, argued that he had been discriminated against based on his race when he was forced to ride in a segregated car while traveling within Mississippi....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: 1916
Docket: 216
244 U.S. 564
37 S. Ct. 701
61 L. Ed. 1317
1917 U.S. LEXIS 1663
Argued: Apr 25, 1917

Darnell v. Edwards Et Al., Constituting The Mississippi Railroad Commission

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Darnell v. Edwards et al., constituting the Mississippi Railroad Commission, 1916, the U.S. Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a state law that required railroads to provide separate but equal accommodations for black and white passengers violated the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The plaintiff, Darnell, argued that he had been discriminated against based on his race when he was forced to ride in a segregated car while traveling within Mississippi. However, the court ruled in favor of Edwards and others who constituted the Mississippi Railroad Commission by upholding segregation laws under "separate but equal" doctrine established earlier in Plessy v Ferguson (1896). The court held that as long as facilities were substantially equivalent there wasn't any violation of constitutional rights.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Darnell v. Edwards et al., it was argued that the Mississippi Railroad Commission did not have the authority to regulate interstate commerce, which included setting rates for railroads operating within its jurisdiction. The dissenting justices believed this power belonged solely to Congress under Article I of the Constitution and that states could only regulate matters of local concern. They also contended that allowing state commissions such as Mississippi's to set railroad rates would lead to a chaotic system with different rules in every state, undermining uniformity in national transportation policy. Furthermore, they disagreed with majority’s interpretation of previous court rulings on similar issues and expressed concerns about potential violations of due process rights if states were allowed unchecked regulatory powers over interstate commerce.

Opinion written by Justice MPitney
Decided: Jun 11, 1917
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