How does the case of Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge affect the Contract Clause of the Constitution?
Answer Hi Frank, I am not sure I see how the case was in any way a step in the decline of the power of the contract clause. The owners of the bridge had a state charter to operate a toll bridge. However, as the Court pointed out, they did not have an EXCLUSIVE right to operate the ONLY bridge over the river. When the state built another bridge right next to it and made it free after a few years, it gutted the profits of the first company, but did not violate anything in the Contract. There is nothing in the Court’s opinion that indicates it would not have upheld an exclusive right if one had been given in the Contract. What the case was really about was whether there was going to be some right for companies to be profitable. If government did things to hurt their profits, should government be responsible for these “damages.” The Court, rightly in my opinion, said no. I think what this case was really about is a recognition of capitalism and free market competition. Up until this time,
