Public Utilities Commission of California v. United States
355 U.S. 534 · Decided March 3, 1958 · Supreme Court of the United States
At a glance
Public Utilities Commission of California v. United States was decided on March 3, 1958 by a vote of 6–3. The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice William O. Douglas wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “National supremacy, commodities” in the Federalism area. SCDB records that the Court declared a state or territorial law, regulation or constitutional provision unconstitutional.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 355 U.S. 534 · 78 S. Ct. 446 · 2 L. Ed. 2d 470 · 1958 U.S. LEXIS 1764
- Docket number
- 23
- Decided
- March 3, 1958
- Argued
- January 7, 1958
- Court era
- Warren Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 6–3
- Majority opinion
- William O. Douglas
- Opinion assigned by
- Hugo L. Black
- How the case arrived
- Appeal
- Issue (SCDB)
- National supremacy, commodities
- Issue area
- Federalism
- Legal provision
- Article VI, Section 2 (supremacy clause)
- Type of law
- Constitution
- Held unconstitutional
- A state or territorial law, regulation or constitutional provision
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Liberal what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Hugo L. Black | Majority | |
| Justice Felix Frankfurter | Majority | |
| Justice William O. Douglas | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Harold H. Burton | Dissent | |
| Justice Tom C. Clark | Majority | |
| Chief Justice Earl Warren | Dissent | |
| Justice John M. Harlan II | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Charles E. Whittaker | Majority |
Full case caption
Public Utilities Commission of California v. United States
SCDB identifiers: case 1957-053, docket 1957-053-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “National supremacy, commodities”
- Hostetter v. Idlewild Bon Voyage Liquor Corp.Law held unconstitutional
- Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control for California v. Ammex Warehouse Co. of San Ysidro, Inc.Law held unconstitutional
- Testa v. Katt
- Allenberg Cotton Co., Inc. v. Pittman
- North Dakota v. United States
- Stephen P. Crosby v. National Foreign Trade CouncilLaw held unconstitutional
Cases on the same legal provision: Article VI, Section 2 (supremacy clause)
- United States v. City of Detroit
- United States v. Township of Muskegon
- City of Detroit v. Murray Corporation of America
- City of Chicago v. AtchisonLaw held unconstitutional
- Rogers v. Calumet National Bank of Hammond
- Werner Machine Co., Inc. v. Director of Division of Taxation
Same Term, same area (Federalism)
- Youngdahl v. Rainfair, Inc.
- International Association of Machinists v. Gonzales
- International Union v. Russell
- City of Chicago v. AtchisonLaw held unconstitutional
- City of Tacoma v. Taxpayers of Tacoma
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error