James Everard's Breweries v. Day
Supreme Court of the United States
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Sanford
These two cases were heard together. They involve the single question whether § 2 of the Supplemental Prohibition Act of November 23, 1921, c. 134, 42 Stat. 222, is constitutional, in so far as it prevents physicians from prescribing intoxicating malt liquors for medicinal purposes. This section of the act provides: “That only spirituous and vinous liquor may be prescribed for medicinal purposes, and all permits to prescribe and prescriptions for any other liquor shall be void.”
The Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution provides that “the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- M'culloch v. State of MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1819
- Martin v. Hunter's LesseeSupreme Court of the United States · 1816
- Logan v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Fong Yue Ting v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- United States v. FisherSupreme Court of the United States · 1805
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by89 opinions
- City of Boerne v. FloresSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- United States v. DarbySupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Tennessee v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- South Carolina v. KatzenbachSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Katzenbach v. MorganSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
84 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.