Summary

Portrait of Harlan F. Stone Harlan F. Stone United States v. California (297 U.S. 175…

The danger to be apprehended is as great and commerce may be equally impeded whether the defective appliance is used on a railroad which is state-owned or privately-owned. No convincing reason is advanced why interstate commerce and persons and property concerned in it should not receiv the protection of the act whenever a state, as well as a privately-owned carrier, brings itself within the sweep of the statute, or why its all-embracing language should not be deemed to afford that protection.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Harlan F. Stone Harlan F. Stone United States v. California (297 U.S. 175…

But there is no such limitation upon the plenary power to regulate commerce. The state can no more deny the power if its exercise has been authorized by Congress than can an individual.
California, by engaging in interstate commerce by rail, has subjected itself to the commerce power, and is liable for a violation of the Safety Appliance Act, as are other carriers, unless the statute is to be deemed inapplicable to state-owned railroads because it does not specifically mention them.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature