Summary

Portrait of Felix Frankfurter Felix Frankfurter United States v. Maher — Opinion of the Court

The recognized practices of an industry give life to the dead words of a statute dealing with it. In differentiating between operations over the 'route or routes' for which an application under the 'grandfather clause' is made as against operations 'within the territory', Congress plainly adopted the familiar distinction between 'anywhere-for-hire' bus operations over irregular routes and regular route bus operations between fixed termini.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Felix Frankfurter Felix Frankfurter United States v. Maher — Opinion of the Court

By this legislation Congress responded to the felt need for regulating interstate motor transportation through familiar administrative devices, while at the same time it satisfied the dictates of fairness by affording sanction for enterprises theretofore established. Whether an applicant seeking exemption had in fact been in operation within the immunizing period of the statute was bound to raise controverted matters of fact. Their determination Congress entrusted to the Commission.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Felix Frankfurter Felix Frankfurter United States v. Maher — Opinion of the Court

The latter section requires a finding by the Commission that the granting of such a certificate is demanded by public convenience and necessity. But under Section 206 (a) the Commission must issue 'such certificate without requiring further proof that public convenience and necessity will be served' by an applicant who 'was in bona fide operation as a common carrier by motor vehicle on June 1, 1935, over the route or routes or within the territory for which application is made and has so operated since that time'.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature