In re Debs

In re Debs
In re Debs
	Supreme Court of the United States
Argued March 25–26, 1895; Decided May 27, 1895
Full case name	In re Eugene V. Debs, Petitioner
Citations	158 U.S. 564 (more) 15 S. Ct. 900; 39 L. Ed. 1092; 1895 U.S. LEXIS 2279
Holding
	The court ruled that the government had a right to regulate interstate commerce and ensure the operations of the Postal Service, along with a responsibility to "ensure the general welfare of the public."
Court membership
	Chief Justice Melville Fuller Associate Justices Stephen J. Field · John M. Harlan; Horace Gray · David J. Brewer; Henry B. Brown · George Shiras Jr.; Howell E. Jackson · Edward D. White
Case opinion
Majority	Brewer, joined by unanimous
Laws applied
	U.S. Const.

In re Debs, 158 U.S. 564 (1895), was a US labor law case of the United States Supreme Court decision handed down concerning Eugene V. Debs and labor unions.

Background

Eugene V. Debs, president of the American Railway Union, had been involved in the Pullman Strike earlier in 1894 and challenged the federal injunction ordering the strikers back to work where they would face being fired. The injunction had been issued because of the violent nature of the strike. However, Debs refused to end the strike and was subsequently cited for contempt of court; he appealed the decision to the courts.

The main question being debated was whether the federal government had a right to issue the injunction, which dealt with both interstate and intrastate commerce and shipping on rail cars.

Judgment

Justice David Josiah Brewer held, for a unanimous court, in favor of the U.S. government. Joined by Chief Justice Melville Fuller and Associate Justices Stephen Johnson Field, John Marshall Harlan, Horace Gray, Henry Billings Brown, George Shiras, Jr., Howell Edmunds Jackson, and Edward Douglass White, the court ruled that the government had a right to regulate interstate commerce and ensure the operations of the Postal Service, along with a responsibility to "ensure the general welfare of the public." The decision somewhat slowed the theretofore building momentum of labor unions, which had been making gains in government in respect to legislation, Supreme Court decisions, etc. Debs would go on to lose another Supreme Court case in Debs v. United States.

Significance

In Loewe v. Lawlor the Supreme Court stated that unions were in fact potentially liable for antitrust violations. In response Congress passed the Clayton Act of 1914 to take unions out of antitrust law. Debs would go on to lose another Supreme Court case in Debs v. United States.

Notes

References

Papke, David Ray. (1999) The Pullman Case: The Clash of Labor and Capital in Industrial America. Lawrence, Kansas: University Press of Kansas ISBN 0-7006-0954-7

External links

Works related to In re Debs at Wikisource
Text of In re Debs, 158 U.S. 564 (1895) is available from: Justia Library of Congress WorldLII

This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.