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

Reid v. Colorado

• 1902 • 187 U.S. 137 • Fuller Court
In the 1902 case of Reid v. Colorado, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Colorado law that prohibited bringing diseased cattle into the state from other states in order to protect local livestock health and prevent disease spread. The plaintiff, Mr. Reid, was a Texas rancher who had been convicted under this law for driving his cattle herd through Colorado on their way to market in Kansas City without having them inspected first for contagious diseases as required by state statute. He challenged...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 Fuller Court
Term: 1902
Docket: 269
187 U.S. 137
23 S. Ct. 92
47 L. Ed. 108
1902 U.S. LEXIS 801
Argued: Oct 24, 1902

Reid v. Colorado

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the 1902 case of Reid v. Colorado, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Colorado law that prohibited bringing diseased cattle into the state from other states in order to protect local livestock health and prevent disease spread. The plaintiff, Mr. Reid, was a Texas rancher who had been convicted under this law for driving his cattle herd through Colorado on their way to market in Kansas City without having them inspected first for contagious diseases as required by state statute. He challenged his conviction arguing that it violated both due process rights and interstate commerce clause protections since only Congress has authority over such matters. However, the court ruled against him stating that while Congress does have exclusive power over interstate commerce regulation when it chooses to exercise it; until then states can legislate within their borders even if those laws might impact interstate trade indirectly or incidentally - especially where public health is concerned like preventing animal disease outbreaks which could devastate local economies dependent on farming & ranching industries.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Reid v. Colorado, Justice John Marshall Harlan argued that the majority's decision was a misinterpretation of the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. He contended that Congress had exclusive power to regulate interstate commerce and states could not interfere with this power by enacting laws like Colorado's cattle quarantine statute. According to him, such state laws were unconstitutional as they directly burdened and obstructed interstate commerce. Moreover, he asserted that if each state enacted its own regulations on matters affecting interstate commerce, it would lead to confusion and conflict among different jurisdictions which is contrary to the purpose of having a federal government in place. Therefore, he disagreed with his colleagues' view who upheld Colorado’s law stating it was within their police powers aimed at protecting local livestock from Texas fever carried by imported cattle.

Opinion written by Justice JHarlan(1)
Decided: Dec 01, 1902
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