Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority
Significance, Brandeis Proposes "ashwander Rules", Louis Brandeis
Tennessee Valley Authority
That the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) was not a legitimate federal agency, and that it did not have the authority to sell the electrical power that was a by-product of its dam construction.
Chief Lawyers for Petitioner
Forney Johnston, James M. Beck
Chief Lawyers for Respondent
John Lord O'Brian, Stanley F. Reed
Justices for the Court
Pierce Butler, Charles Evans Hughes (writing for the Court), James Clark McReynolds, Owen Josephus Roberts, Harlan Fiske Stone, George Sutherland, Willis Van Devanter
Louis D. Brandeis, Benjamin N. Cardozo
Date of Decision
17 February 1936
Legislation establishing the TVA was upheld by a 8-1 vote, as was its right to sell electrical power.
- Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Company, 157 U.S. 429 (1895).
- Gall v. Exxon Corp., 418 F.Supp. 508 (1976).
- LaShawn A. v. Barry, 69 F.3d 556 (1995).
Edward Frank Magill. Great Lives From History. Salem Press, 1987.
- Hall, Kermit L. The Supreme Court and Judicial Review in American History. Washington, DC: American Historical Association, 1985.
- Maidment, R. A. The Judicial Response to the New Deal: The U.S. Supreme Court and Economic Regulation, 1934-1936. Manchester, NY: Manchester University Press, 1991.
- Murphy, Walter, William Harris, and James Fleming. Constitutional Interpretation. Mineola, NY: Foundation Press, 1986.
- Inc. Baldwin v. G. A. F. Seelig - Significance, The Cross-appeal, Violation Of The Commerce Clause, Keeping Trade Open Between The States
- Alexander Pantages Trials: 1929 - Schoolgirl Versus "slinky"
- Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority - Significance
- Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority - Brandeis Proposes "ashwander Rules"
- Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority - Louis Brandeis
- Other Free Encyclopedias