Citation network
Fry Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 27, 1975
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
Fry v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 421 U.S. 542 (1975) U.S. Supreme Court Fry v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 421 U.S. 542 (1975) Fry v. UnitedSearch
-
not immune from all federal regulation under the Commerce Clause merely because of their sovereign status. Maryland v. WirtzSearch
-
in the state pay act. The Ohio Supreme Court granted the writ and ordered the increases to be paid. State ex rel. Fry v. FergusonSearch
-
construed the Act as applying to state employees, and as thus construed upheld its constitutionality. United States v. OhioSearch
-
F.2d 936 (1973). Relying on the decisions of this Court in Maryland v. WirtzSearch
-
U. S. 183 (1968), and United States v. CaliforniaSearch
-
to the States does not warrant the inference that controls could not be extended to their employees. See Case v. BowlesSearch
-
United States v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
others similarly situated, affects commerce among the States or with foreign nations. See Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. UnitedSearch
-
Page 421 U. S. 548 On the facts of this case, this argument is foreclosed by our decision in Maryland v. WirtzSearch
-
under the Supremacy Clause, the State must yield to the federal mandate. See Public Utilities Comm'n of California v. UnitedSearch
-
Murphy v. O'BrienSearch
-
have long recognized that the interpretation of a statute by an implementing agency is entitled to great weight. Udall v. TallmanSearch
-
granted. MR. JUSTICE REHNQUIST, dissenting. Mr. Chief Justice Chase, in his opinion for the Court in Texas v. WhiteSearch
-
functions. The Government countered this argument with language from United States v. CaliforniaSearch
-
own boundaries, was subject to the provisions of the Federal Safety Appliance Act. Today's decision, like Maryland v. WirtzSearch
-
supra, and United States v. CaliforniaSearch
-
of course, precisely the same reasoning may be advanced in support of the result in Wirtz and in United States v. CaliforniaSearch
-
and the basic constitutional principles which it illumines. As stated by MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS, dissenting in Maryland v. WirtzSearch
-
not believe that the Constitution was intended to permit the result reached today, and so I dissent. United States v. CaliforniaSearch
-
in Maryland v. WirtzSearch
-
present era of Commerce Clause law in this Court. The Court was in the process, later completed in cases such as NLRB v. JonesSearch
-
Laughlin Steel Corp., 301 U. S. 1 (1937), and United States v. DarbySearch
-
authority to regulate economic affairs. It is quite understandable in this context that the Court, in United States v. CaliforniaSearch
-
asserts only a claim of lack of legislative power. Under cases such as The Shreveport Rate Cases, supra, Wickard v. FilburnSearch
-
U. S. 111 (1942), and Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. UnitedSearch
-
the latter claim is of greater force, and may succeed when the former will fail, is well established. See, e.g., Leary v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. JacksonSearch
-
Tot v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 319 U. S. 463 (1943). In this case, as well as in Wirtz and United States v. CaliforniaSearch
-
not apparent to me why a State's immunity from the plenary authority of the National Government to tax, United States v. ButlerSearch
-
choices suffer. Much of the law of intergovernmental tax immunity to which the Court referred in United States v. CaliforniaSearch
-
of a State was shortly modified. See Graves v. NewSearch
-
U. S. 555 however, the Court had occasion to discuss the question of intergovernmental tax immunity in New York v. UnitedSearch
-
this formulation of the test. Mr. Chief Justice Stone, who was the author of the Court's opinion in United States v. CaliforniaSearch
-
of the State quite as much as a like tax imposed by a State on property or activities of the national government. Mayo v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. at 326 U. S. 587 . The Court's decision in Hans v. LouisianaSearch
-
of the Tenth Amendment. The familiar history of this Court's Page 421 U. S. 557 decision in Chisholm v. GeorgiaSearch
-
the subsequent reaction which gave rise to the enactment of the Eleventh Amendment, has been told and retold. Monaco v. MississippiSearch
-
its terms, forbade the federal courts only to entertain suits by the citizens of one State against another State. Hans v. LouisianaSearch
-
to the Federal Safety Appliance Act. But the operation of schools, hospitals, and like facilities involved in Maryland v. WirtzSearch
-
to regulate activities in the national interest which could not be reached by the commerce power alone. Cf. Yakus v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Fry v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial