Ann Arbor Railroad v. United States: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Russell D. Jones (subpages) |
mNo edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{subpages}} | {{subpages}} | ||
'''Ann Arbor Railroad v. United States''' was a 1930 U.S. Supreme Court case which defined the Hoch-Smith Resolution as an expression of Congressional opinion and not a matter of law, thus enjoining the ICC from following it. | |||
==Sources== | |||
Samuel P. Huntington, "The Marasmus of the ICC: The Commission, the Railroads, and the Public Interest," ''The Yale Law Journal'' 61, No. 4 (April 1952): 467-509. | Samuel P. Huntington, "The Marasmus of the ICC: The Commission, the Railroads, and the Public Interest," ''The Yale Law Journal'' 61, No. 4 (April 1952): 467-509. | ||
Huntington was an instructor in government, Harvard University. | Huntington was an instructor in government, Harvard University. | ||
See also [[Interstate Commerce Commission]] | See also [[Interstate Commerce Commission]][[Category:Suggestion Bot Tag]] | ||
Latest revision as of 16:01, 10 July 2024
Ann Arbor Railroad v. United States was a 1930 U.S. Supreme Court case which defined the Hoch-Smith Resolution as an expression of Congressional opinion and not a matter of law, thus enjoining the ICC from following it.
Sources
Samuel P. Huntington, "The Marasmus of the ICC: The Commission, the Railroads, and the Public Interest," The Yale Law Journal 61, No. 4 (April 1952): 467-509.
Huntington was an instructor in government, Harvard University.
See also Interstate Commerce Commission