Economy Light & Power Co. v. United States
Headline: Court blocks proposed dam on the Desplaines River, ruling the river is an interstate navigable water and requiring federal approval before the company may build.
Holding:
- Stops the company from building the dam without federal approval.
- Requires Army engineers and the Secretary of War to approve such projects.
- Keeps historically used interstate waterways under federal protection for future commerce.
Summary
Background
A company in Illinois proposed to build a dam on the Desplaines River in Grundy County just below Joliet and above where the Desplaines joins the Kankakee to form the Illinois River. The federal government sued in federal court to stop the work, arguing the dam was being built without Congress’s consent, without state authorization, and without approval of the Chief of Engineers and the Secretary of War as required by the 1899 Act. Lower courts rejected the separate claim that the United States owned the riverbed but granted an injunction based on the river’s navigable status.
Reasoning
The central question was whether the Desplaines was a navigable water under the Act of March 3, 1899. The Court applied the long-standing test whether a river, in its natural state, was used or capable of being used as a highway for commerce. Evidence showed the Chicago–Desplaines–Illinois route carried fur trade and supplies from the late 1600s into the early 1800s, even with portages and changing conditions. The Court held the river was navigable in its natural state, that the Act covers such waterways, and therefore the proposed dam required federal approval. The informal hearing before the War Department did not substitute for formal approval.
Real world impact
The ruling forbids the company from building the dam unless Congress, the State legislature, or the Army engineers and the Secretary of War give the required approvals. It confirms that waterways once used for interstate commerce remain subject to federal protection even if currently unused. The decision upholds the injunction enjoining construction and reinforces Congress’s power to preserve and improve natural interstate waterways for future commerce.
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?