Alabama v. Arizona, 291 U.S. 286 (1934), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that Alabama's investment in prison labor does not make its opposition to a other states' laws limiting the sale of prison-made-goods justiciable.[1][2]

Alabama v. Arizona
Decided February 5, 1934
Full case nameAlabama v. Arizona
Citations291 U.S. 286 (more)
Holding
Alabama's investment in prison labor does not make its opposition to a other states' laws limiting the sale of prison-made-goods justiciable.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Charles E. Hughes
Associate Justices
Willis Van Devanter · James C. McReynolds
Louis Brandeis · George Sutherland
Pierce Butler · Harlan F. Stone
Owen Roberts · Benjamin N. Cardozo
Case opinions
MajorityButler, joined by unanimous
ConcurrenceStone (no opinion)

Description

edit

Nineteen states including Arizona passed laws making it unlawful to sell goods created with prison labor from other states. Because Alabama stood to lose hundreds of thousands of dollars in trade as a result of these laws, it sued the other states directly in the Supreme Court, using the Court's original jurisdiction over cases between states. However, the Court determined that Alabama's pleadings did not state facts that entitled it to relief. Further, the Court said that any decision issued by the court would constitute an unconstitutional advisory opinion; the dispute was not justiciable.[1]

References

edit
  1. ^ a b Alabama v. Arizona, 291 U.S. 286 (1934)
  2. ^ Lieberman, Jethro K. (1999). "States, Disputes Between". A Practical Companion to the Constitution. p. 480.
edit