Pierce Cty., Washington v. Guillen: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
Lost Student (talk | contribs) m (Lost Student moved page Pierce County, Washington v. Guillen to Pierce Cty., Washington v. Guillen) |
Lost Student (talk | contribs) m (Text replacement - "|case_treatment=No " to "") |
||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
|subject=Constitutional Law | |subject=Constitutional Law | ||
|appealed_from= | |appealed_from= | ||
|overturned= | |overturned= | ||
|partially_overturned= | |partially_overturned= |
Latest revision as of 03:40, July 14, 2023
Pierce Cty., Washington v. Guillen | |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
---|---|
Citation | 123 S.Ct. 720 (2003) |
Date decided | 2003 |
Facts
The respondent was killed at an intersection where funding had been requested for improvements but was denied. Congress had made a law that this information was not allowed to be admitted in court, because otherwise the states would be reluctant to admit that anything was wrong on certain roads.
Issues
Whether the Highway Safety Act which protects information compiled or collected in connection with certain federal highway safety programs from being discovered or admitted in certain federal or state trials is a valid exercise of Congress’s authority under the Constitution.
Holding
Congress has the proper authority.
Rule
Legislation aimed at improving safety in the channels of commerce and increasing protection for the instrumentalities of interstate commerce is constitutionally acceptable.