 | This article includes alist of references,related reading, orexternal links,but its sources remain unclear because it lacksinline citations. Please helpimprove this article byintroducing more precise citations.(July 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
| Hughes v. Oklahoma | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued January 9, 1979 Decided April 24, 1979 | |
| Full case name | William Hughes v. Oklahoma |
| Citations | 441U.S.322 (more) 99 S. Ct. 1727; 60L. Ed. 2d 250; 1979U.S. LEXIS 35 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Appeal from the Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma |
| Holding | |
| The Congress may enact legislation governing wildlife on federal lands. When conflicting state law exists, the supremacy clause ensures that federal legislation will prevail. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Brennan, joined by Stewart, White, Marshall, Blackmun, Powell, Stevens |
| Dissent | Rehnquist, joined by Burger |
This case overturned a previous ruling or rulings | |
| Geer v. Connecticut (1896) | |
Hughes v. Oklahoma, 441 U.S. 322 (1979), was aUnited States Supreme Court decision, which held that theUnited States Congress may enact legislation governingwildlife onfederal lands.
Oklahoma enacted statutes that prevented any person from sellingminnows found within the natural waters of the state of Oklahoma outside of the state of Oklahoma. Oklahoma claimed that the purpose of the statute was for wildlife conservation. The underlying legal controversy arose when William Hughes was convicted of shipping minnows fished from Oklahoma waters out of the state.
The Supreme Court held that the statute violated theDormant Commerce Clause because it discriminated the flow of interstate commerce without being the least discriminatory alternative. The Court stated that when conflicting state law exists, thesupremacy clause ensures that federal legislation will prevail. The Court thereby overruledGeer v. Connecticut (1896), rejecting the earlier case's "19th centurylegal fiction of state ownership" of wildlife. In the Court's view, this "fiction" had "been eroded to the point of virtual extinction in cases involving regulation of wild animals." With the fall ofGeer, the last precedential impediment to the federal government'swildlife management authority was removed.
 | This article related to a case of theSupreme Court of the United States of theBurger Court is astub. You can help Wikipedia byexpanding it. |