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

Williams v. United States.

• 1897 • 168 U.S. 382 • Fuller Court
In the case of Williams v. United States in 1897, the Supreme Court ruled on a matter concerning maritime jurisdiction and criminal law. The defendant, Mr. Williams was convicted for manslaughter committed on an American vessel while it was docked at a foreign port (Yokohama, Japan). He appealed his conviction arguing that U.S courts did not have jurisdiction over crimes committed in foreign territories even if they occurred aboard American vessels. However, the Supreme Court upheld his...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: 1897
Docket: 266
168 U.S. 382
18 S. Ct. 92
42 L. Ed. 509
1897 U.S. LEXIS 1732
Argued: Oct 27, 1897

Williams v. United States.

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Williams v. United States in 1897, the Supreme Court ruled on a matter concerning maritime jurisdiction and criminal law. The defendant, Mr. Williams was convicted for manslaughter committed on an American vessel while it was docked at a foreign port (Yokohama, Japan). He appealed his conviction arguing that U.S courts did not have jurisdiction over crimes committed in foreign territories even if they occurred aboard American vessels. However, the Supreme Court upheld his conviction stating that under international law and U.S statutes such as Section 5339 of Revised Statutes which extends federal laws to American ships in foreign waters; U.S courts indeed had jurisdiction over crimes occurring aboard its flagged vessels regardless of their location globally. This ruling affirmed that US sovereignty extended to its citizens or property abroad when permitted by international agreements or principles.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Williams v. United States, Justice Harlan argued that the majority's decision to uphold a law allowing federal courts in Alaska to apply "any rule of common law" was too broad and potentially unconstitutional. He contended that this provision could be interpreted as giving these courts power beyond what is constitutionally permitted for any court - state or federal. Furthermore, he expressed concern about potential abuses of such wide-ranging authority by judges who might use it arbitrarily or capriciously. Harlan also disagreed with the majority's view that Congress had intended to grant such extensive powers when it passed legislation establishing a judicial system in Alaska; instead, he believed they meant only to allow those courts to follow general principles of common law where no specific statutes existed.

Opinion written by Justice JHarlan(1)
Decided: Nov 29, 1897
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