Munn v. Illinois (1877) was the supreme court ruling that declared that grange laws were constitutional. The decision was based on the argument that railroads provided a public service and therefore were not completely private.
Raised the temperature of the slavery debate, when the Supreme Court declared that the Constitution protected property, and slaves were property. Strictly this would mean that no state could declare itself to be free soil.
The Supreme Court ruling that stated slaves were property was Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857). The Court held that African Americans, whether free or enslaved, were not U.S. citizens and therefore could not bring a case to federal court. This decision also declared that Congress did not have the power to prohibit slavery in U.S. territories.
It is called the same. Other than a public ruling, which affects the relations of state governmental bodies, private ruling deals with private persons, which can be an individual or an entity, whether business or not.
the Interstate Commerce Commission
True. Slaves were property and not citizens, so they had no civil rights. The Supreme Court ruling in the Dred Scot decision affirmed this concept of slaves as property.
what is the supreme courts ruling in the case Plessy vs ferguson
what is the supreme courts ruling in the case Plessy vs ferguson
majority opinion
ruling* Gibbons v. Ogden*
No the Congress can not nullify a ruling of the Supreme Court. The Congress would have to rewrite the law which the Supreme Court had declared unconstitutional. Then the new law could overrule the Supreme Court IF the new law was declared constitutional if/when appealed.
Kelo v. City of New London, 545 US 469 (2005)On June 24, 2005, The United States Supreme Court ruled in Kelo v. City of New London (CT) that local governments have the right to force property owners to sell their property in order to make land available for private economic development. It is significant to note that this was a 5/4 ruling. Nearly half of the justices disagreed. The decision favored the rich and powerful and influential of society and left no recourse for the small property owner of a desirable parcel of land. The decision is a good example of how a court sculpted along political lines can change the law to favor one group, most often the rich and powerful and influential.