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

United States v. Winchester And Potomac Railroad Company

• 1895 • 163 U.S. 244 • Fuller Court
In the United States v. Winchester and Potomac Railroad Company case of 1895, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the government, asserting its right to regulate interstate commerce under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. The dispute arose when Winchester and Potomac Railroad Company refused to comply with a federal law requiring them to report their earnings annually for taxation purposes. The company argued that this requirement was an infringement on their rights as it involved...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: 1895
Docket: 195
163 U.S. 244
16 S. Ct. 993
41 L. Ed. 145
1896 U.S. LEXIS 2261
Argued: Apr 01, 1896

United States v. Winchester And Potomac Railroad Company

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the United States v. Winchester and Potomac Railroad Company case of 1895, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the government, asserting its right to regulate interstate commerce under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. The dispute arose when Winchester and Potomac Railroad Company refused to comply with a federal law requiring them to report their earnings annually for taxation purposes. The company argued that this requirement was an infringement on their rights as it involved intrastate business activities which were beyond federal jurisdiction. However, the court held that since railroads are instrumentalities of interstate commerce, they fall within Congress's regulatory power even if some aspects involve intrastate operations.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

The dissenting opinion in the case of United States v. Winchester and Potomac Railroad Company argued that the majority's decision was incorrect because it failed to consider the nature of a railroad as a public highway, which is subject to governmental regulation. The dissenters believed that railroads are not merely private property but also serve an important public function, thus making them different from other types of private property. They contended that when Congress granted land for construction of railroads, it did so with the understanding that these would be used for public benefit and could therefore be regulated by government authorities. Therefore, they disagreed with the majority's ruling which held otherwise - stating instead that such lands were given without any implied right to regulate rates or services provided by those companies on their own properties.

Opinion written by Justice JHarlan(1)
Decided: May 18, 1896
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