Di Santo v. Pennsylvania

Background

A man who sold steamship tickets to Europe in Harrisburg was prosecuted under a Pennsylvania law that required anyone (except the carriers) to get a state license to sell such tickets. He represented four steamship companies, used their forms, posted their certificates, collected payments (usually keeping 25% at the time of application), and promptly sent money to the companies. He was convicted in a local trial court; a Superior Court reversed that conviction on constitutional grounds, the State Supreme Court then reinstated the conviction, and the case reached the United States Supreme Court.

Reasoning

The central question was whether the state law unconstitutionally burdens commerce with other countries. The majority said selling steamship tickets for passage to Europe is part of foreign commerce and that the license fees, bonding, and reporting requirements directly burden that commerce. The Court held such a direct burden cannot be justified as a state police power to prevent fraud because Congress has the primary authority over foreign commerce, so the Pennsylvania statute cannot stand and the conviction was reversed.

Real world impact

The decision limits states’ ability to require licensing and fees for independent sellers of overseas passage tickets. That means local ticket dealers who arrange international travel cannot be regulated in this way if their work is a direct part of foreign commerce. The opinion notes Congress, not the states, is the proper actor to set uniform protections against fraud in these transactions.

Dissents or concurrances

Justices Brandeis and Stone dissented, arguing the law was a local consumer-protection measure aimed at frauds on immigrants and did not directly impede foreign commerce, so the state should be allowed to supervise ticket dealers.