Citation network
Hughes Vs. Oklahoma
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Apr 24, 1979
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
-
U.S. 322 (1979) U.S. Supreme Court Hughes v. OklahomaSearch
-
U.S. 322 (1979) Hughes v. OklahomaSearch
-
Clause was rejected, and he was convicted and fined. The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed, relying on Geer v. ConnecticutSearch
-
The Oklahoma statute is repugnant to the Commerce Clause. Pp. 441 U. S. 325 -339. (a) Geer v. ConnecticutSearch
-
state may regulate and control the taking, subsequent use and property rights that may be acquired therein. Lacoste v. DepartmentSearch
-
Geer v. StateSearch
-
P.2d 573, 575 (1977). We noted probable jurisdiction, 439 U.S. 815 (1978). We reverse. Geer v. ConnecticutSearch
-
designed to prohibit the transportation beyond the State of natural gas produced by wells within the State. West v. KansasSearch
-
see id. at 221 U. S. 252 -254 (distinguishing Ohio Oil Co. v. IndianaSearch
-
of exports of natural resources, the West analysis emerged as the dominant approach. See, e.g., Pennsylvania v. WestSearch
-
Mond, 336 U. S. 525 (1949). Today's principle is that stated in Pike v. BruceSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
natural resource of landfill areas within the State for the disposal of waste generated within the State. Philadelphia v. NewSearch
-
of wild animals. The first challenge to Geer's theory of a State's power over wild animals came in Missouri v. HollandSearch
-
U.S. at 252 U. S. 434 . Foster-Fountain Packing Co. v. HaydelSearch
-
analysis became explicit in Toomer v. WitsellSearch
-
Douglas v. SeacoastSearch
-
fisherman or hunter, has title to these creatures until they are reduced to possession by skillful capture. . . . Geer v. ConnecticutSearch
-
is permissible under the general rule articulated in our precedents governing other types of commerce. See, e.g., Pike v. BruceSearch
-
Hunt v. WashingtonSearch
-
but will determine for itself the practical impact of the law. Lacoste v. LouisianaSearch
-
Foster-Fountain Packing Co. v. HaydelSearch
-
Pike v. BruceSearch
-
Philadelphia v. NewSearch
-
purposes similar to the States' interests in protecting the health and safety of their citizens. See, e.g., Firemen v. ChicagoSearch
-
Mond, 336 U.S. at 534-535. Philadelphia v. NewSearch
-
Willson v. BlackSearch
-
Cooley v. BoardSearch
-
Port Richmond & Bergen Point Ferry Co. v. BoardSearch
-
Parker v. BrownSearch
-
Southern Pacific Co. v. ArizonaSearch
-
The Court has recognized that Geer's analysis of the authorities on this issue is open to question. Toomer v. WitsellSearch
-
between the result in this case and that in Geer was not overlooked by the dissenting Justices. See Pennsylvania v. WestSearch
-
post at 441 U. S. 340 -341, n. 3. The Court opinion in Pennsylvania v. WestSearch
-
in July, 1926. The state legislature may have been encouraged to take such action by certain language in Lacoste v. LouisianaSearch
-
See Hicklin v. OrbeckSearch
-
Geer on the same basis used in Foster-Fountain Packing Co., 334 U.S. at 334 U. S. 404 -406. Takahashi v. FishSearch
-
to their own people whenever such hoarding and confinement impedes interstate commerce. Foster-Fountain Packing Co. v. HaydelSearch
-
Pennsylvania v. WestSearch
-
West v. KansasSearch
-
Baldwin v. MontanaSearch
-
Douglas v. SeacoastSearch
-
It is no more curious, however, than this Court's recent pronouncements on the validity of Geer v. ConnecticutSearch
-
For less than one year ago, we unreservedly reaffirmed the principles announced in Geer. Baldwin v. MontanaSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Hughes v. OklahomaSearch
-
Lacoste v. DepartmentSearch
-
the State. West v. KansasSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial