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

Morgan v. Virginia

• 1945 • 328 U.S. 373 • Stone Court
In the 1946 case Morgan v. Virginia, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that segregation on interstate buses was unconstitutional, violating the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. The case was brought by Irene Morgan, an African American woman who refused to give up her seat and move to the back of a Greyhound bus traveling from Virginia to Maryland in 1944 - a decade before Rosa Parks' similar act of defiance. She was arrested for refusing to comply with state law mandating segregated seating on...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 Stone Court
Term: 1945
Docket: 704
328 U.S. 373
66 S. Ct. 1050
90 L. Ed. 1317
1946 U.S. LEXIS 3039
Argued: Mar 27, 1946

Morgan v. Virginia

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the 1946 case Morgan v. Virginia, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that segregation on interstate buses was unconstitutional, violating the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. The case was brought by Irene Morgan, an African American woman who refused to give up her seat and move to the back of a Greyhound bus traveling from Virginia to Maryland in 1944 - a decade before Rosa Parks' similar act of defiance. She was arrested for refusing to comply with state law mandating segregated seating on public transportation within its borders. In a landmark decision, Justice Stanley Reed delivered majority opinion stating that such laws placed undue burden on interstate commerce and were thus invalid under federal law.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Morgan v. Virginia, Justice Stanley Reed argued that while he agreed with the majority's goal of eliminating racial discrimination, he disagreed with their method of using judicial power to enforce social reform. He believed that such changes should come from legislative action rather than court rulings. Reed contended that it was not within the Court’s jurisdiction to regulate interstate commerce or dictate how private businesses should operate unless there were clear constitutional violations involved. He also expressed concern about potential overreach by federal courts into state affairs and cautioned against undermining states' rights in favor of national uniformity on issues like segregation policies.

Opinion written by Justice SFReed
Decided: Jun 03, 1946
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