Geer v. Connecticut
Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.
Status
More on how this was screened
Hughes rejected Geer's rule that state ownership of wildlife permits a state to bar its interstate shipment, while preserving state authority to conserve wildlife through measures consistent with the Commerce Clause. Later opinions reporting that overruling add no separate treatment.
32 later cases cite Geer v. Connecticut; 32 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.
Relying on Geer v. Connecticut?
This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.
Treatments
Overruled
-
The Supreme Court expressly overruled Geer's Commerce Clause holding that state ownership of wildlife allowed a ban on interstate shipment of lawfully taken game.
Hughes v. Oklahoma · Supreme Court of the United States · filed
We noted probable jurisdiction, 439 U. S. 815 (1978). We reverse. Geer v. Connecticut, 161 U. S. 519 (1896), on which the Court of Criminal Appeals relied, is overruled.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →
Does this case still carry your argument?
Describe your facts. Ezel reads Geer v. Connecticut and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace