|
<br />6 DECIllIONS PERTINE1IT TO PROPOSED WATER RIGHTS Acr
<br />
<br />Con~rCS3 could not hn....e h~~n unaccpHlintcrl with th~:"c fact." and its purpose was
<br />evidently to t.hrow t.he whole weight of its power behind the 1:it.ato ~ystcm:i, not-
<br />wit.lu;tnlldill~ t.Ill~:-;c variations.
<br />It would ~cnc no usdul purpose now to inquire whether or how far this effort
<br />was ncccs::nrYi in view of the explicit. n'scrvations made in the m:l.jority opiuinn
<br />in the South- ';n~t.crn case. Nor is it necessary to conclude that Con~rr.:;s, by
<br />enn.ctinll; the !\'lcCnrrnn Act, sought to validate every cxistinp; St:l.te n~~ullltion Of
<br />tax. For ill [1,11 that mass of legislation Illust have Io.in SOIne provh,ions which
<br />may have been subject to serio\ls question on the score or other comititutionnl
<br />Hmit:d,iollS in llddition to commerce-clause ohjections arising- in the dorlll:l.ncy of
<br />Congre;-;g' power. And we agree with Prndentin.l thn.t there can be no inference
<br />that Congress int.<:nded to circumvent constitutiona.l limitations upon its own
<br />power.
<br />nut, though Con.'!:rcs5 had no purpose to validn.te unconstitutional provi1:iions
<br />of Stute laws, ex{~cpt insofar as the Constitution iL!>clf gives Con~ress the power
<br />to do this by removing obstacles to State act.ion arisill~ from its o\\"n action or
<br />by cOIl'icnting to such In.w:,; (H. Hept. No, 1-13, iUth Cong., ht fie!;s., p. 3), it
<br />clearly put the full wcight of its po\\"er hehiurl existing and future StaLe le~i~lation
<br />to sustain it from any attack under the commerce claus~ to whatever eKtent this
<br />mny be done with the force of that power bdlinrl it, subject only to the exceptions
<br />expressly provided for.
<br />Two cOllrlllsion::;, c_orollnry in charactcr amI important for this CU:-l(>, Tllust be
<br />drawn (rom COIIE!:r(,~fi' nction .and tile circumstancc.') in which it wa.>:; taken. Olle
<br />is that .Congress int.ended to declare, and in effect declared, that uniformity of
<br />rcgubtion, und of State t:"LXOUOll, arc not required in refcrenee to the bW;line::-fl of
<br />in.o;ur[llH'C by thc llntiollul public interes.t, except ill the ~pecific re:'ipects ot.herwise
<br />exprc;o;:;Jy pro\'idcd for. Thb Jwc('<;:,,-nril.v was 3 determinat.ion by COIl~rc=,s that
<br />State t..'l.Xe5, which in its "ilellcc might be held invalid as discriminawry, do not
<br />place on intcrstnte insurance bll~ille~s. n burden which it is unable generally to
<br />bear or should not benr in the cOlllPctit.ion with 10('0.1 bu~iIlCs'i. Such taxes wore
<br />not uncommon among the States, ulld the ::;tatute ('I(~nrly included South Carolina's
<br />tax now in issue.
<br />That jllrlF!:lT1Cllt wag one of polir,y and r('flected lonf2: and clear experience. ... ... ...
<br />* * ~ Prudellt.ial's cn::;c for di'i('fimination lllll~t re:-,t upon the idc."\. either t.hat
<br />the commerce clanse forhids the :)tatc t.o exnct. more from it in taxc~ th:\1\ from
<br />purel~' local bu~ines~; or that the t...1.K is somehow technically of an inhercntly
<br />discriminatory ch3n\cter or pO:"of-ibly of a type which would excludn or seriollsly
<br />handicap new ent.rants s~eking to est:l.bli.sh thcm:;elves in SOllth Cnrolina. A? to
<br />each of tbe~c grounds, moreover, thc argument :-;uhsumes tlw.t. Congress' contrary
<br />judgment, as a matter of policy rf'lntillg' t.o t.he regulfl.t.ion of inter:,;tfl.te commerce
<br />cannot be effect.ive, either lIof its own force" alone or Ql'! operati....e in conjunct.ion
<br />'With and to "\l~taill the St3te\ policy.
<br />In view of all these consioC'rnlions, we would be going vcry fR.r to rule that South
<br />Carolil1l\ 110 longer may collcct her tax. To do 50 would !lout the exprc:-:;:~I~. de.
<br />clarcd po1icie~ of both COIl~re:-;s and thc St.ate. :\Ioreo\'er it would c~t.3blbh a
<br />rulinp; never h~retofor~ mude and. in doillg this would depfLrt from the whole trend
<br />of deci!'lion in a great \"[Iriety of situations most ulIfllop;o\ls to the onc now pre::<ented.
<br />Fot', as we have alrcady emphasized, t.he authorities most clo:"ocly ill point llpon
<br />the prohlem (Lr(l lIot, fl.'i appellant in'!1:-;(..., tllnse relatillg to c/i,'icriminatorr State
<br />tnxe~ Illid ill i1Lt~ dnrlllnllcy of COllgrl'~s' Jl(lW(~r. T1H'Y l'Itc mther the cleci~ion8
<br />which, ill eVt'ry ill~\.nIH"~ tlm" far lIot. lntpr oVl'rt,lIrll.~c1, l11lV{~ ~1I~taill.~(1 cOllrdilll\tnd
<br />act.ion tllkell hy (\JllJ,1;n'~~ n1lll Llle StalL'S ill l,h,~ n~~lllnll(J1l of COllllllt:rC(:.
<br />Thn power o( C(J/J~rc:",..; o\'(.'r COlllmeree C'xerci."ed elltirely wit.holll. rcfl'rcllce to
<br />coordinatcd n.et.ion of tIll.: States is not restrietcd, except as the Constitution ex.
<br />pre!:lsly providcg, by any limitation which forbids it to dis.criminate fl.gRin::;t, inter-
<br />at.n.te commcrce and in favor of local tmoe. Its plenary !5cope ellable~ Conp;res9
<br />not only to promote but also to prohibit interst.ate commerce, R!'\ it has done
<br />frequently and (or a. grC'Rt. '\"llriety o( rensons. Th..<J.t power docs not run down a.
<br />one-way street or one of narrowly fixed dimensions. COllgrc.<>g may keep the way
<br />open, confine it broadly or closel...., or cJO:':ie it ent.irely, subject only to the restrictions
<br />placed upon it.... authority by other con'ititutional provisions and the requirement
<br />that. it shall not invade the domaills o( action rc!'erved exclusj\'cly (or the States.
<br />This brond authority Congress may l:xcrcise alone, subject to those limitH.tionB,
<br />or in conjunction with coordinated action by the States, in which case limitations
<br />imposed (or the prescrvation o( their pov.'ers become inoperative and only those
<br />deaigned to (orbid action sltogether by any power of combination of powers in
<br />our governmental system remain effeotive. Here both Congress and South Ca.ro--
<br />
<br />DECISIONS PE'R1'Il'lE,,'T TO' PROPOSED WATER
<br />RIGHTS ACT 7
<br />lil~a h~\"c aclpd, and in COlnn]L'te coordill'ltio t '
<br />r('lnfnrc....d by t.lle cx{'r~is.. of' "II tl . n, 0 sustain t.he hx. It is tlh'rcfo"e
<br />Cl . - . " . II> power of g'o\"(~ t. . .
<br />par lLll.(l.e;ross lllu::;t he the evil Wllich w01I1 t llrrmcn. reSl(ltllg' ~n our !'ehcmc.
<br />~ollJd an.;;e flllly b:,-" l'xcccdillJ!: oeyond p,'l.vil s ( liB .1 .'. ~\l('h fill exerlu:m, one which
<br />lmposcd by a COI1Sl.itutioll'll pro\.isio'~ l)mo.<:~'pllclt all.d cOlflp<:]Jmg limit:~t.ion
<br />outlaw ~ltc act.ioll takcll elltireh: frl)~m or pr~;.I~IO~lS d('i;JgllCU Illld illtcIJ(led to
<br />. I~ thl8light the n.rgUllwnt t.llat the (1~lrr con~ 'It.llt'](.HI:~J fr:.Ltnl'\\"ork.
<br />IJna s l;Lx h;l~.in\'ol\"(~d, if :l.nv, puts it be .~~~ of dlscr.JmlllatlOll which South Cnro_
<br />must fall o( lis 0'\--11 wci"h'. N }. ~l tilc pO\\('r of gO\"f'l"lI01ent to COnliJiue
<br />, J tt '" "'.... 0 conc{~lv:1J)I(;: \'ioJat."o f tJ
<br />m c er or Sfnnt, JS presented N.' . ! H 0 1e COlr1ln~rce clau"e
<br />(pp. 429-43U). ' or b contraventIOn of any otller limit.lti~n'
<br />... 'Il' ... .
<br />"'A f '"
<br />s or the dllc-procc...s content . 'I<
<br />tllOrlUC8 prior to the dUlIllI 1.:"Lste f lOll, It W.'l.S settled by ll. 10llg hnc o( au
<br />1.llh nmcndrnent '\5 well '\<:: ~II" t rn t eCIslou, th.~t the SIII1lI.~r pro\.ision of the-
<br />fo h d I (. ' ' . ~ ... ,I rcqUlrlllg cfpnl prot t f h
<br />r I, [Ie .-:'It.Ltes to 1.\)" Hnd collect St I, '.. ,ec Ion 0 t. C b\\s, does 1I0t
<br />~hc 5...h :\lllelldnH'tlt doc:-,; Ilot more n:l.rr~\\\~~ Ctll\.LS South C.lro!lll:\'s Certainly
<br />It and the 11th t Lken togeillCr ,lCcamp!" I ~ jll nc_ th.e po\\er of COllLtreSS; !lOr do
<br />eXCrclsc o( po\\er hy the Congress ,tlld ~lil ~S~ I ,.1 re:::.trletlOllllpon the coordlU,\tcd
<br />The argument g-rounderl II on the fi e . ates. .
<br />thut eXCI~CS sh:.lll be unlformPthrOIl"Il;t~~ ~i;11l5~ of article I, "'cetlOn 8, reC1111ring
<br />eX:\ctlOn with the lfnlllg of '\n excI"" b (' c lmted St,l.te6, Idclltlfies the ~tattl
<br />"pn/ies TI' , I ' .,e \-' ()llO'rcss to 1\.l11Ch 'I h
<br />I' . w; IS r olle all the theon' tlint C" , . .( one t e lllTIltatlOn
<br />grass ,has Uadopted" the t.1X as its O.\\fl ~ ~u Illo~e has occurred thnll that Con~
<br />Stnte s exertion of its OWll pOwer nlld' f ~ttCeptlOn wllleh otl\IOU5ly il,mores the
<br />natc~ eX~rClse of F('der.ll f\/ld State :\1'lt~~rJ "le.rm~re, seeks to restrict the c00rdl-
<br />the h~dcral UXIllf.!: po\\er \\ hell H is e~ert d \t.~ b;~ l\ 11I11lt.l.tJOll :lppllC,lbJc onh. to
<br />The "":lme o!>S(,r\',ltJOn npplJes :l1::;0 to tl e \Itho~t n'(crCllce to all\' ~t.\te actIon
<br />. Th? fin:\! cOlltcJltio~ th,Lt t~ 'sust l.mleUcontclItlOlctb:1scd on llrtlde I, sectIOn 1.
<br />lD\aSIOn of the St.Lte's OW1I po\\er of ta . Ie ac~, :\n thus the t:\x, \\ould be a~
<br />ealJ for no cmnmcllt other than to 0 X.Ltwn IS so cl~\rly hcklllp: in merit ,15 to
<br />tentlons dl5cIlssed III the precedlll~Pplllt out ih:l~, by Jll"tl.l.pOSltlOll \\Ith the COn4
<br />to brIng the act illto collision" it II j,n.LW,lP 1,. t Ie effect would be :\t one stroke
<br />po\\}~r anrlat the ~.\me tIme to 1I11IJJf~,nS\ ,lilOns ~peratl\.e only upon the Federal
<br />. !'\o sllch anomalolls COIl'iCrjuC'llce r lJ ,L e rn~t Mlty. ..
<br />Into the respcctive spheres of Fedcmrll~~\~[r~.rl thh d~n:olOn of l('gisbt1\'c pO\\er
<br />appllca..ble to each of these se )aratel . a e aut only: Th~re arc limitations
<br />But neither the former !lor the~lattt: ) and some to th....lr coordinated exerClse
<br />authority IS thus dlVldcd S h r arc t~ be found mercly In the fnet that th.
<br />po\\er ?y Congres" I\nd tlw S~~tc~ ~0I~ee6JtI~1I \\ouJd reduce ~l:e JOInt exerczse oC
<br />our.5~clcty belo\\ the cfTcet1\O ran cOorc .1c",e common end:,; In the reJl;ulution o(
<br />~vSlt In speCific constJtutiolll\llillllfRIIOI~~hcrtro\\er separately exerted, \\ithout
<br />e -n~w of no grounding, III eIther cOllstit~I~1 1Cr\\1SC' than in the d!\'blon it::-clf.
<br />restrJCtlOl/. For gre:\t rcu:o,=.lnS o( policy and h~nLl.1 CXperll'nce Or Spirit, for such a
<br />the,..,e great po\\ers were separated 'I'h tory not now neces::oary to rcstnte
<br />dOlllg ~o to achlCve legislative co"nse u~y \H're IlO~ forbldd~n to COOperate or b '
<br />regulatl~g c.on:mcrce and taxation W~ichnces, partICUlarly In the great fields J.
<br />acc~mphsh In 1.,,0!atcd {"."{crtioll.' , to some extent at least, neither could
<br />\\ c hn\'c cOllsu!crcd nppcll1l.lIt's other . .
<br />that th~ M(~C:Hrnll Ad, ('olls't.nwd as \\'e }, c?,n.tcn:lon~, in.cludill~ the su~~c~tion
<br />Sould lIl....ol....t! nil lIllt'on:-;ti\'llti011ClI.J ,I, ~,l~e Illtcrp~Ltcd It awl thus gh'ell effect
<br />~ tn.t.cii. 1':01" rC'aMl/lS /-l.lrcndy :-;ct f t ~IC~.ll~?ll by CO.lI!-:l'l'S:'I. of it~ power to t.ho
<br />Instanco 01 dclegat.ion is involved 0 or tl~ up otllcr8, 1I1(.:/udmg the fIlet that no
<br />437-44~). n e n,('.ts, we find them without merit (PP.
<br />The Judgment accordingly is affirmed (
<br />p, 440).
<br />
<br />,
<br />,
<br />
<br />B. NA.VIG.-\TION
<br />1. Coole)! v. Board of IV I 1 h .
<br />299 (1851)) was" "nse of 'lI';ns a. t e Port of Ph,la,lclphia (12 How
<br />gress passed abw (1 StaiP f ,age lfi nangable \\'ll~ers. In 1789 Con~
<br />continue to be re~ulated in5 c) declor.lfig i~at all pIlots of sbips should
<br />the States where;; their sbips o~f~h~~Y WTlihb th]e laws, respectively of
<br />(R S. 4235; 46 U. S, C. 211), re:ds: e. at aw, still on the books
<br />
|