Case Facts: A law in Iowa prevented the manufacture of alcohol within the state, even though the alcohol was to be sold out of state. Kidd challenged the constitutionality of the law claiming that it infringed on Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce.
Issue/s: Is the state law in conflict with Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce?
Holding/reasoning: No
The statute affects in-state manufacturing not interstate commerce. Production is not a part of interstate commerce and therefore is under the state’s “police power”. The law is constitutional and valid.
Relevance: The supreme court made a distinction between production and distribution. The decision held that congress’s power to regulate did not encompass manufacturing. The power of congress to regulate came into play once manufacture was completed and commerce began.
References:
Russel & Winslow’s Syllabus-digest of All the Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/128/1/
http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100036263?rskey=Kg3ll4&result=1