pf_01787 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

THE COAL In view of fact that laws protecting the mailar of the Congress embrace necessary to insure the serf" transit and prompt, deli and mail matter and not mails under that exclusive Congress but "mail" w such and so long as it contemplation of Law National Government. U D.CMo.1955. 137 FSupp. 235 F.2d 930. certiorari 266. 352 U.S. 943. 1 I-Ed2d- The power of Congress ovc is not unlimited and is subiecg,g of Rights. Securities and..F Commission v. Timetrust. Inc., 1939. 28 FSupp. 34. .SM 3. Exclusiveness of power The power of the Congress t4 the mail is exclusive and its rigid the receipt, carriage and ultimat cry of mail "to the person to +Ji directed" is therefore supremo Maxwell. D.C.Mo.1955. 137 F.S14 affirmed 235 F.2d 930. certiorari 77 S.Ct. 266. 352 U.S. 943. I I U Only Congress regulates maikJ ed States. Severs v. Abrahaffisoc 124 N.W.2d I50. 255 Iowa 979. 4. Delegation of powers .See Notes o/ Decisions under, sa o/ this article 5. State regulation or control ally I8 US.C.A. § 1461 punishing tual mailing or advertising by obscene material did not pree regulatory field. and state obscc utc in no way imposing a bu interfering with federal postal fi was not repugnant to this clause ing to Congress power to establ offices and post roads. Roth v. t & N.Y.1957. 77 S.Ct. 1304. 354 t 1 LEd.2d 1498. rehearing de S.CL 8. 355 U.S. 952, 2 S FA ZdA This power. having been eta; the federal government. is e4 :-�- power a Lhe several stattexi fish any postal systern. and I si4 law made a monopoly cxd- Yale individuals from peting or portal systems In States. Hoover v. M 1897. 81 F. 472. W.S.A. 201.42 t3erss;rsi.w vo Art. 1 pos-T OFRCES AND POST ROADS .�$, d. 7 46094 12 „..1 j+ttcrfere with use of mail. did n,.t luuhibit such companies from using .nu�fs did not interfere with Con. c.tclusivc pourer to determine what ~haU be carried and what shall be ex- ludcd in maiisrand did not -violate this clause, ,misers Life & Cis. Union v. yaasc. 1966. 141 N.W2d 297. 30 Wis.2d 339. appeal dismissed 87 S.Ct. 407. 385 US. M. 17 1 Ed 301. rehearing dc- nied 87 S.Ct. 739. 385 US 1033. 17 LEd.26 681. b. Drugs The operation of the mails was not affected by dvc New Mexico Controlled Substances Act. 1953 Camp. § 54-11-21. and this clause giving Congress the pow- cr to establish past offices died not prccmpt blew Mexico jurisdiction to pro- hibit the distribution of controlled sub• .tanccs by the mailing of the substance. Statc v. htcllorse. 1973. 517 Pad 75. 85 753. 7. - Labor orixtiltatlons The provisions of McKinncy's N.Y. Cisil Rights Law. §§ 41. 43. 45. forbid• ding labor organizations from denying membership therein because of rate, col- or. or creed. as applied to railway postal clerks association. is not repugnant to provision of this clause conferring on Congress the authority over postal mat. tcm and hence is not unconstitutional as an attempt to regulate a federal instru. mcntality since the low does not impinge on federal mail service or the power of the govcrnmcni to conduct it. Rztlway Mail Assn v. Corsi. :4.Y.1945. 65 S.Ct_ 1493. 326 US. 88. 89 I -Ed. 2072_ 8 - Taxation Statute providing for the taxation of intangibles was applicable to postal sav- ings certificates and not unconuitutional a% contrary to provision of this article %cuing in Congress power to borrow money on credit of the United States and to establish post oWxx:. Lutz v. Arnold. 1935. 193 N.& M 208 and- 480. petition overruled 196 H.E. 702. 208 trxL 48M Motor vehicle t= imposed by Laws 1923. c. 41 S. on nso r trucks used in interstate cotstawcxv- dicta not vioLue this clause. eying Cotes pow,ta to es• tablish post ortiv= WW post roads. State v. OCigney. 1925. 202 N.W. 893. 162 . 302. -!scion tax ors situoaxobites d+cvot- ed e$tluavely to is ion of Snails is void. Louwdn v. Moody. Tex.Cortt. 4. - Zooits: If Postmaster General. pursuant to am ,n exercise of authonty vested in him by Congrcssional enactment. contemplates erection of post office on proposed site. his swbor"T -rrw.y not be-zca aed. by . local ordinance. and resort to local zon- ing board is wry. Crivcllo V. Board of Adjustment of h3onxtgt of Mid- dlesex. D.C.N.J.1960. 183 FSupp. 826. Rtdusal by city zoning board of appti- eatior for use of lot as substation post office. which had been leased to United States for ten years. was not unconstitu- tional as unlawful regulation of property of United States. since such property was not within exclusive jurisdiction of Unit- cd Sutcs. Mayor and City Councul of Baltimore v. Linthicum. 1936. 183 A. 531. 170 Md. 245. 10. Acquisition of land for post offices The authority of the federal govern- rncni to acquire property necessary or suitable for post office is within the. ex- press grant of power given by this Provi- sion. US. v. Certain Parcels of Land in Town of Denton of Caroline County. D.C.Md.1939. 30 FSupp. 372- The pourer expressly given to the Unit. cd States to csublish post offices and carry on offensive and defensive war by general grant of power to do all which was necessary and proper to effectuate those express powers gave the United States the power to exercise eminent do- main over tcrniorial lands within the. limit.% of the United States. an,.i all lands needed for the scat of the government of the United Stasis, and for establishment of post office-, forts. arsenals, and athcr needful buildings. US. v. 458.95 acres of Land. D.C.Pa.1938. 22 FSupp. 1017. 11. ExitinSrtatton of letters or parcels No law of Congress can place in the hands of officials connected with the postal service any authority to invade the secrecy of letters and such scaled Packages in the mail: and all regulations adopted as to mail of this hind tt tm be subordinate to the principle embodi ed in Amcnd. 4. Ex parts Jackson. N.Y.1878. 96 US. 724. 6 Otto. 724. 24 LFd 877. Sce. also. Blwkham v. Gresham- C-"- YA 993. 16 F. 609. 17- >r'oscigra mad Foreipo talil is so closely cone ccu d with a p:vper sysum of inland mail as that the power to organize and eairry on a ,general postoffnee syztesa would srrrtn