This is a list of cases reported in volume 208 of United States Reports, decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1908.
| Supreme Court of the United States | |
|---|---|
 | |
 | |
| 38°53′26″N 77°00′16″W / 38.89056°N 77.00444°W | |
| Established | March 4, 1789 |
| Location | Washington, D.C. |
| Coordinates | 38°53′26″N 77°00′16″W / 38.89056°N 77.00444°W |
| Composition method | Presidential nomination with Senate confirmation |
| Authorised by | Constitution of the United States, Art. III, § 1 |
| Judge term length | life tenure, subject to impeachment and removal |
| Number of positions | 9 (by statute) |
| Website | supremecourt |
Justices of the Supreme Court at the time of volume 208 U.S.
editThe Supreme Court is established by Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States, which says: "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court . . .". The size of the Court is not specified; the Constitution leaves it to Congress to set the number of justices. Under the Judiciary Act of 1789 Congress originally fixed the number of justices at six (one chief justice and five associate justices).[1] Since 1789 Congress has varied the size of the Court from six to seven, nine, ten, and back to nine justices (always including one chief justice).
When the cases in volume 208 were decided the Court comprised the following nine members:
| Portrait | Justice | Office | Home State | Succeeded | Date confirmed by the Senate (Vote) |
Tenure on Supreme Court |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Melville Fuller | Chief Justice | Illinois | Morrison Waite | July 20, 1888 (41–20) |
October 8, 1888 – July 4, 1910 (Died) |
|
John Marshall Harlan | Associate Justice | Kentucky | David Davis | November 29, 1877 (Acclamation) |
December 10, 1877 – October 14, 1911 (Died) |
|
David Josiah Brewer | Associate Justice | Kansas | Stanley Matthews | December 18, 1889 (53–11) |
January 6, 1890 – March 28, 1910 (Died) |
|
Edward Douglass White | Associate Justice | Louisiana | Samuel Blatchford | February 19, 1894 (Acclamation) |
March 12, 1894 – December 18, 1910 (Continued as chief justice) |
|
Rufus W. Peckham | Associate Justice | New York | Howell Edmunds Jackson | December 9, 1895 (Acclamation) |
January 6, 1896 – October 24, 1909 (Died) |
|
Joseph McKenna | Associate Justice | California | Stephen Johnson Field | January 21, 1898 (Acclamation) |
January 26, 1898 – January 5, 1925 (Retired) |
|
Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. | Associate Justice | Massachusetts | Horace Gray | December 4, 1902 (Acclamation) |
December 8, 1902 – January 12, 1932 (Retired) |
|
William R. Day | Associate Justice | Ohio | George Shiras Jr. | February 23, 1903 (Acclamation) |
March 2, 1903 – November 13, 1922 (Retired) |
|
William Henry Moody | Associate Justice | Massachusetts | Henry Billings Brown | December 12, 1906 (Acclamation) |
December 17, 1906 – November 20, 1910 (Retired) |
Notable Cases in 208 U.S.
editAdair v. United States
editAdair v. United States, 208 U.S. 161 (1908), was a United States labor law case in which the Supreme Court declared that bans on "yellow-dog" contracts (that forbade workers from joining labor unions) were unconstitutional. The decision reaffirmed the doctrine of freedom of contract which was first recognized by the Court in Allgeyer v. Louisiana (1897). For this reason, Adair is often seen as defining what has come to be known as the Lochner era, a period in American legal history in which the Supreme Court tended to invalidate legislation aimed at regulating business.[2][3]
Loewe v. Lawlor
editLoewe v. Lawlor, 208 U.S. 274 (1908), also called the Danbury Hatters' Case, is a Supreme Court case in United States labor law concerning the application of antitrust laws to labor unions. The Court's decision effectively outlawed the secondary boycott as a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act, despite union arguments that their actions affected only intrastate commerce.[4] It was also decided that individual unionists could be held personally liable for damages incurred by the activities of their union.
Muller v. Oregon
editIn Muller v. Oregon, 208 U.S. 412 (1908), the Supreme Court upheld the general police powers of a state to protect the welfare of women even when it infringed on her fundamental right to negotiate contracts. Inequality, the Court said, was not a deciding factor because the sexes were inherently different in their particular conditions and had completely different functions; labor laws that were made to nurture women's welfare and for the "benefit of all" people were held not to be a violation of the Constitution's Contract Clause.
Citation style
editUnder the Judiciary Act of 1789 the federal court structure at the time comprised District Courts, which had general trial jurisdiction; Circuit Courts, which had mixed trial and appellate (from the US District Courts) jurisdiction; and the United States Supreme Court, which had appellate jurisdiction over the federal District and Circuit courts—and for certain issues over state courts. The Supreme Court also had limited original jurisdiction (i.e., in which cases could be filed directly with the Supreme Court without first having been heard by a lower federal or state court). There were one or more federal District Courts and/or Circuit Courts in each state, territory, or other geographical region.
The Judiciary Act of 1891 created the United States Courts of Appeals and reassigned the jurisdiction of most routine appeals from the district and circuit courts to these appellate courts. The Act created nine new courts that were originally known as the "United States Circuit Courts of Appeals." The new courts had jurisdiction over most appeals of lower court decisions. The Supreme Court could review either legal issues that a court of appeals certified or decisions of court of appeals by writ of certiorari.
Bluebook citation style is used for case names, citations, and jurisdictions.
- "# Cir." = United States Court of Appeals
- e.g., "3d Cir." = United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
- "C.C.D." = United States Circuit Court for the District of . . .
- e.g.,"C.C.D.N.J." = United States Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey
- "D." = United States District Court for the District of . . .
- e.g.,"D. Mass." = United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts
- "E." = Eastern; "M." = Middle; "N." = Northern; "S." = Southern; "W." = Western
- e.g.,"C.C.S.D.N.Y." = United States Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York
- e.g.,"M.D. Ala." = United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama
- "Ct. Cl." = United States Court of Claims
- The abbreviation of a state's name alone indicates the highest appellate court in that state's judiciary at the time.
- e.g.,"Pa." = Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- e.g.,"Me." = Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
List of cases in volume 208 U.S.
editNotes and references
edit- ^ "Supreme Court Research Guide". Georgetown Law Library. Retrieved April 7, 2021.
- ^ Philips, Michael J. The Lochner Court, Myth and Reality: Substantive Due Process from the 1890s to the 1930s. Greenwood Publishing Group, 2001. p. 10.
- ^ Wiecek, William M. The History of the Supreme Court of the United States. Volume 12, The Birth of the Modern Constitution: The United States Supreme Court, 1941–1953. Cambridge University Press, 2006. p. 25 f.
- ^ Carter, Saalim A. Labor Unions and Antitrust Legislation: Judicial Activism vs. Judicial Restraint from 1890-1941. Penn State University, 2006. p. 28.
See also
editExternal links
edit- [1] Case reports in volume 208 from Library of Congress
- [2] Case reports in volume 208 from Court Listener
- [3] Case reports in volume 208 from the Caselaw Access Project of Harvard Law School
- [4] Case reports in volume 208 from Google Scholar
- [5] Case reports in volume 208 from Justia
- [6] Case reports in volume 208 from Open Jurist
- Website of the United States Supreme Court
- United States Courts website about the Supreme Court
- National Archives, Records of the Supreme Court of the United States
- American Bar Association, How Does the Supreme Court Work?
- The Supreme Court Historical Society
