Citation network
Kansas Vs. Colorado
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 13, 1907
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. 46 (1907) U.S. Supreme Court Kansas v. ColoradoSearch
-
U.S. 46 (1907) Kansas v. ColoradoSearch
-
Elliot Debates, p. 151. In M'Culloch v. MarylandSearch
-
See also Martin v. HunterSearch
-
Wheat. 304, 14 U. S. 324 , opinion by Mr. Justice Story. In Scott v. SandfordSearch
-
constitutional rule that this is a government of enumerated powers. Page 206 U. S. 82 In M'Culloch v. MarylandSearch
-
judicial power which the new nation was capable of exercising. Construing this article in the early case of Chisholm v. GeorgiaSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
In reference to this question attention may, however, properly be called to Hans v. LouisianaSearch
-
U. S. 1 . Page 206 U. S. 83 The decision in Chisholm v. GeorgiaSearch
-
the jurisdiction over suits or actions by one state against another. As said by Chief Justice Marshall in Cohen v. VirginiaSearch
-
South Dakota v. NorthSearch
-
the controlling action of any of its instrumentalities or agencies. The creature cannot rule the creator. Kawananakoa v. PolyblankSearch
-
U. S. 349 . Nor is it inconsistent with the ruling in Wisconsin v. PelicanSearch
-
general grant of national power. We may also notice a matter in respect thereto referred to at length in Missouri v. IllinoisSearch
-
Rhode Islands v. MassachusettsSearch
-
grant of judicial power, jurisdiction over suits brought by the United States has been sustained. United States v. TexasSearch
-
United States v. MichiganSearch
-
of the United States to suit in one of its own courts without its consent has been repeatedly recognized. Kansas v. UnitedSearch
-
U. S. 86 obstructions in the natural waterways and preserve the navigability of those ways. In United States v. RioSearch
-
Story, J., in Martin v. Hunter'sSearch
-
United States v. HarrisSearch
-
effect to its scope and meaning. As we said, construing an express limitation on the powers of Congress, in Fairbank v. UnitedSearch
-
acted in disregard to this limitation. As said by Mr. Justice White, delivering the opinion of the Court in Gutierres v. AlbuquerqueSearch
-
has full jurisdiction over the lands within its borders, including the beds of streams and other waters. Martin v. WaddellSearch
-
Pollard v. HaganSearch
-
Kaukauna Water Power Co. v. GreenSearch
-
Water Power Company v. WaterSearch
-
Kean v. CalumetSearch
-
Canal Company, 190 U. S. 452 . In Barney v. KeokukSearch
-
In Hardin v. JordanSearch
-
force in the absence of express statute. As said by Mr. Page 206 U. S. 95 Justice Gray in United States v. WongSearch
-
the common law, the principles and history of which were familiarly known to the framers of the Constitution. Minor v. HappersettSearch
-
Boyd v. UnitedSearch
-
Smith v. AlabamaSearch
-
Bradley, J., in Moore v. UnitedSearch
-
this territory prior to its formation into states. See also the opinion of the Supreme Court of Kansas in Clark v. AllamanSearch
-
into the Union, they were admitted with the full powers of local sovereignty which belonged to other states ( Pollard v. HaganSearch
-
distinguished from the common law of the several states. This contention was made in Western Union Telegraph Company v. CallSearch
-
on no one of the others, and is bound to yield its own views to none. Yet whenever, as in the case of Missouri v. IllinoisSearch
-
give. Page 206 U. S. 99 In deciding this case on demurrer, we said, referring to the opinion in Missouri v. IllinoisSearch
-
of local private right, and involves a matter of state interest, and must be considered from that standpoint. Georgia v. TennesseeSearch
-
are to be confined to a case in which the facts and the local law of the two states are as here disclosed. In Clark v. AllamanSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial