Gibbons vs. Ogden

Today I read an excerpt from Gibbons vs. Ogden, yet another example of how different views on the meaning of the constitution can cause confusion. In the case, the New York legislature granted Aaron Ogden the exclusive right to run a steam ferry from New Jersey to New York. Thomas Gibbons, another steamboat owner, had a federal license "to be employed in carrying on the coasting trade”, and set up a rival ferry, causing Ogden to sue him. The case was brought before the Supreme Court, where it was decided whether it was the federal or state government’s duty to regulate transportation. The constitution states that “Congress shall have power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes.” After some talk, it was decided that navigation is included in commerce, putting it under Congress’ jurisdiction. It was also decided that the states and Congress could not both have the power to regulate navigation, and that it belonged to Congress alone. In the end, Gibbons was allowed to continue his business, and Ogden’s monopoly on steamboat travel in New York was declared void.