Summary

Portrait of Noah Haynes Swayne Noah Haynes Swayne Gunn v. Barry — Opinion of the Court

Congress cannot, by authorization or ratification, give the slightest effect to a State law or constitution in conflict with the Constitution of the United States. That instrument is above and beyond the power of Congress and the States, and is alike obligatory upon both. A State can no more impair an existing contract by a constitutional provision, than by a legislative act
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Noah Haynes Swayne Noah Haynes Swayne Gunn v. Barry — Opinion of the Court

He has an interest in the land to the extent of the judgment; an interest which binds it in the hands of the debtor and to whomsoever the debtor may transfer it. Then comes the new constitution and law, which withdraws the whole of the land from the lien, and for all practical purposes dissolves or destroys the lien. The remedy, which was before complete, is now annihilated. And the creditor who, before, would have been paid in full, is deprived of getting anything. If this is not impairing the obligation of a contract-if it is not destroying vested rights what is?
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Noah Haynes Swayne Noah Haynes Swayne Gunn v. Barry — Opinion of the Court

But the increase in the magnitude of the exemption was denied by the argument in Georgia. On the contrary, looking at the number of items exempted under the old law, and their character, it was asserted that in some cases of land in some families the exemption would be much less. A homestead of at least 50 acres, worth any sum, and if a man had ten children, of 100 acres, was exempted.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature