Missouri v. Holland
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Missouri_v._Holland an entity of type: Thing
Missouri v. Holland, 252 U.S. 416 (1920) is a United States Supreme Court decision on the extent to which international legal obligations are incorporated into federal law. The case centered on the constitutionality of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, which prohibited the killing, capturing, and selling of certain migratory birds pursuant to an earlier treaty between the U.S. and the United Kingdom. The state of Missouri challenged the enforcement of the Act within its jurisdiction, arguing that the regulation of game was not expressly delegated by the U.S. Constitution to the federal government, and was therefore reserved for the states under the Tenth Amendment; accordingly, the U.S. government had no constitutional right to enter into a treaty concerning game regulation.
rdf:langString
rdf:langString
Missouri v. Holland
rdf:langString
rdf:langString
State of Missouri v. Holland, United States Game Warden
xsd:integer
1022445
xsd:integer
1103672746
rdf:langString
Van Devanter, Pitney
rdf:langString
White, McKenna, Day, McReynolds, Brandeis, Clarke
xsd:integer
40
rdf:langString
United States v. Samples, 258 F. 479
xsd:integer
416
xsd:integer
252
xsd:gMonthDay
--03-02
xsd:integer
1920
rdf:langString
Missouri v. Holland,
xsd:gMonthDay
--04-19
xsd:integer
1920
rdf:langString
State of Missouri v. Holland, United States Game Warden
rdf:langString
Protection of a State's quasi-sovereign right to regulate the taking of game is an insufficient jurisdictional basis, apart from any pecuniary interest, for a bill by a State to enjoin enforcement of federal regulations over the subject alleged to be unconstitutional. Treaties made by the federal government are supreme over any state concerns about such treaties having abrogated any states' rights arising under the Tenth Amendment.
rdf:langString
Missouri v. Holland
rdf:langString
Holmes
rdf:langString
Missouri v. Holland, 252 U.S. 416 (1920) is a United States Supreme Court decision on the extent to which international legal obligations are incorporated into federal law. The case centered on the constitutionality of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, which prohibited the killing, capturing, and selling of certain migratory birds pursuant to an earlier treaty between the U.S. and the United Kingdom. The state of Missouri challenged the enforcement of the Act within its jurisdiction, arguing that the regulation of game was not expressly delegated by the U.S. Constitution to the federal government, and was therefore reserved for the states under the Tenth Amendment; accordingly, the U.S. government had no constitutional right to enter into a treaty concerning game regulation. In a 7–2 decision, the Court upheld the Act as an exercise of the federal government's treaty power, with the supremacy clause of the Constitution elevating treaties above state law. The Court also reasoned that protecting wildlife was in the national interest and could only be accomplished through federal action. Missouri is also notable for Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes's reference to the legal theory of a living constitution, the notion that the Constitution changes over time and adapts to new circumstances without formal amendments.
xsd:nonNegativeInteger
13654