In Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) Marshall read "commerce" to include navigation and all commercial intercourse, and "among the several States" to reach commerce that concerns more states than one, so a federal coasting license overrode New York's steamboat monopoly.
The Commerce Clause gives Congress power "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes." Under the Articles of Confederation, states taxed and blocked one another's trade, and Congress could do nothing about it; that was a main reason for the Convention (you saw it in The Commerce Power). The first great case on the clause came in 1824, five years after McCulloch, and it was about steamboats.
💡 Why it works
Marshall read the clause broadly because the problem it solved was national. A power that stopped at each state line would leave Congress unable to govern a voyage from one state into another, exactly the kind of trade the states had been fighting over. But he also drew a line: the clause does not reach "that commerce which is completely internal, which is carried on between man and man in a State, or between different parts of the same State, and which does not extend to or affect other States." It reaches "that commerce which concerns more States than one."
🔑 Key idea
Gibbons v. Ogden (1824): "commerce" includes navigation and all commercial intercourse; "among the several States" reaches commerce that concerns more states than one, even inside a state's borders; a valid federal law overrides a conflicting state grant. Purely internal commerce of a state remains with the state.
Tap each phrase.
✏️ Worked example: Applying Gibbons's line
Under Gibbons alone, which of these could Congress regulate? (a) A ferry carrying passengers between two states. (b) A shop selling bread to neighbors in one town, with no effect elsewhere. (c) A riverboat running from one city in a state to another, carrying cargo bound for a third state.
(a) Navigation between states: commerce that concerns more states than one. Yes.
(b) Completely internal commerce that does not affect other states. Not under Gibbons's line.
(c) The voyage is inside one state, but the cargo is part of interstate trade. "Intermingled" commerce: yes.
Answer: (a) and (c). Later cases would move the line, as the rest of this unit shows.
✏️ Worked example: Where the limits come from
Marshall wrote that the restraints on Congress's commerce power lie in "the wisdom and the discretion of Congress, their identity with the people, and the influence which their constituents possess at elections." What kind of check is that?
Not a judicial limit on how much Congress may regulate within the clause.
A political check: voters can remove members who regulate unwisely.
This idea returns in Garcia (1985), which left states' protection mostly to the political process.
Answer: A political safeguard. Gibbons defined the clause's scope; within it, the check is elections.
⚠️ Common mistake
Thinking Gibbons let Congress regulate everything. It defined "commerce" broadly and let federal power reach inside state borders, but it expressly left "completely internal" commerce to the states. Check: does the activity concern more states than one?
Madison explained the need for the clause in Federalist No. 42, and Hamilton described the trade wars among the states under the Articles in Federalist No. 22. Next: the Court's narrow era.
This is an educational course, not legal advice.
Practice
Pass with 3 right answers, the last 2 in a row. Each right answer earns 3 XP.