Delegation of Legislative Authority by Congress
In the case of Field v. Clark, 143 U.S. 649, petitioner, Marshall Field & Co., et al., was subjected to taxes on imported merchandise under the tariff act approved October 1, 1890 (26 Stat. 567, c. 1244). Field & Co. claimed this was unconstitutional, and filed suit against the collector of the port of Chicago (J. M. Clark) to recover duties. The Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois upheld the provisions of the act. Field then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
In the case of Buttfield v. Stranahan, 192 U.S. 470, plaintiff in error, Buttfield, sued collector of the Port of New York, Stranahan, in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, to recover damages for "the alleged wrongful seizure, removal, and destruction of the tea". The tea in question had been rejected as "inferior to standard quality" based upon the tea inspection act (29 Stat.
604, c. 358) passed on March 2, 1879. The Supreme court of the state of New York did not rule in favor of the plaintiff in error. The case was directed to the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals for the Southern district of New York and then to the Supreme court of the United States.
In the case of Panama Refining v. Ryan, 293 U.S. 388, the Executive was authorized under sec 9 (c) of the National Industrial Recovery Act to prohibit the "transportation of interstate and foreign commerce of petroleum". Violation of such an order carried the potential of criminal prosecutions. The Texas based Panama Refining Company sued in order to restrain those carrying out the Executive Order, stating it was in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The District Court commanded that...