· 5/27/1895

In Re Debs

Citations

158 U.S. 564
15 S. Ct. 900
39 L. Ed. 1092
1895 U.S. LEXIS 2279

Syllabus

The order of the Circuit Court finding the petitioners guilty of contempt, and sentencing them to imprisonment, was not a final judgment or decree. The government of‘the United States has jurisdiction over every foot of soil within its territory, and acts directly upon each citizen. While it is a government of enumerated powers, it has full attributes of sovereignty within the' limits of those powers, among which are the power over interstate commerce and the power over the transmission of the mails. The powers thus conferred are not dormant, but have been assumed and put into practical exercise by Congressional legislation. In the exercise of those powers the United States may remove everything put upon highways, natural or artificial, to obstruct the passage of interstate commerce, or the carrying of the mails. While.it may be competent for the government, through the executive branch and in the use of the entire executive power of the Nation, to forcibly remove all such obstructions, it is equally within its competency to appeal to the civil courts for an inquiry and determination as to the •existence and the character of any of them, and if such are found to exist or threaten to occur, to invoke the powers of those courts to remove or restrain them, the jurisdiction of courts to interfere in such matters by injunction being recognized from ancient times and by indubitable authority. Such jurisdiction is not ousted by the fact that the obstructions are accompanied by or consist of acts in themselves violations of the criminal law, or by the fact that the proceeding by injunction is of a civil character, and may be enforced by proceedings in contempt; as the penalty for a violation of such injunction is no substitute for, and no defence to, a prosecution for criminal offences committed in the course of such violation. The complaint filed in this case clearly shows an existing obstruction of artificial highways fo

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that when the government acts to enforce public rights, “the mere fact that the government has no pecuniary interest in the controversy is not sufficient to exclude it from the courts”
recognizing an inherent authority to protect highways for the passage of interstate commerce and mail
recognizing an inherent authority to protect highways for the passage of interstate commerce and mail
upholding President Cleveland’s power to obtain an injunction against the Pullman Strike despite the absence of any statutory authority, on the grounds that “the wrongs complained of [were] such as affeet[ed] the public at large”
no jury trial in criminal contempt actions because a court in such a case is “only securing to suitors the rights which it has adjudged them entitled to”
“Enforcement of an injunction through a contempt proceeding must occur in the issuing jurisdiction because contempt is an affront to the court issuing the order.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Brewer

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.