Gibbons v. Ogden · ¶111

The “power to regulate commerce,” here meant to be granted, was that power to regulate commerce which previously existed in the States. But what was that power? The States were, unquestionably, supreme; and each possessed that power over commerce, which is acknowledged to reside in every sovereign State. The definition and limits of that power are to be sought among the features of international law; and, as it was not only admitted, but insisted, on by both parties, in argument, that, “ unaffected by a state of war, by treaties, or by municipal regulations, all commerce among independent States'was legitimate,” there is no necessity to appeal to the oracles of the jus communeKfor the correctness of that doctrine. The law of nations, regarding man as a social animal, pronounces all commerce legitimate in a state of peace, until prohibited by positive law. The power of a sovereign state…

U. S. Reports, bound volume
U. S. Reports, volume 22, at 1 (Library of Congress) · transcription: Caselaw Access Project
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.