Ogden's attorneys argued:
- The Court should interpret "commerce" narrowly.
- New York, as a sovereign state, was entitled to regulate commerce within its borders.
- New York had the right to grant Ogden an exclusive legal franchise in Hudson Bay and New York Harbor, which were both under the purview of the state.
- Anyone who wanted to operate a steamboat in New York water had to pay for the privilege.
- New York laws did not interfere with the federal government's right to regulate commerce.
- New York and the federal government had concurrent power over commerce.
Case Citation:
Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 US 1 (1824)
