Muglervs. Kansas 1887
The was a major United States Supreme Court casethat formed a platform for judging and defending economic theoryrelated cases back in the Lochner era. On November 2, 1880, at theheight of the escalating temperance movement, Kansas’ citizensamended their constitution in a bid to control liquor consumption. The new statute declared, “Themanufacture and sale of intoxicating liquors shall be foreverprohibited in this state, except for medical, scientific andmechanical purposes (U.S.Supreme Court 1).”In addition, the regulation required individuals in charge ofdistributing and manufacturing alcoholic beverages to have a speciallicense called a ‘permit’. On February 19, 1881, the Kansasconstitution passed that any individual who aided or manufacturedliquor without applying for relevant permits would be culpable of amisdemeanor (U.S.Supreme Court 1).
On7thMarch, 1885, the legislature substituted the statute with anotherpolicy that claimed that all the stations where intoxicating liquorswere given away, manufactured, bartered, sold or stored pending salewere an irritant and vulnerable to abatement in case the court foundit appropriate (U.S.Supreme Court 1).
PeterMugler was a citizen of the Saline County, Kansas. He was indicted inthe Saline County on May 1, 1881 for breaching the statuterestricting manufacturing and distribution of alcohol in Kansas (U.S.Supreme Court 1).
OnNovember 1881, Mugler was indicted for the first time for allegedlybreaching the alcohol statute governing the Kansas City. He wasoriginally charged with five counts of offences by the DistrictCourt, which found him blameworthy and fined him $100. The SupremeCourt of Arkansas confirmed the ruling (U.S.Supreme Court 1).
On5thDecember 1887, The US Supreme Court upheld the Supreme Court ofKansas’ judgement.The ruling was made on a majority of 8 to 1,and it stated that the Kansas City did not infringe on the USConstitution or the fourteenth amendment of its citizens throughprohibiting manufacturing and distribution of the liquor within itsboundaries, as well as abatement of the value of property used in thestorage and manufacturing of alcohol beverages with its jurisdiction(U.S.Supreme Court 1).
U.S.Supreme Court. Muglerv. Kansas, 123 U.S. 623 (1887)ArguedApril 11, 1887<https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/123/623/case.html>