CONSTITUTIONAL LAW--DUE PROCESS--MARTIAL LAW

Authors

Abstract

The Texas Railroad Commission ordered a limitation of oil production in the East Texas field. Governor Sterling of that State issued a proclamation declaring martial law in the district and setting forth the existence of "a state of insurrection, tumult, riot and breach of the peace," and sent in troops to enforce the orders of the commission. A temporary injunction was issued restraining the commission's action but the governor continued, through the troops, to limit oil production. Such action was sought to be enjoined in the federal courts. The lower court granted the injunction. The decree was affirmed on the ground that such action constitutes a taking of property without due process of law, since the facts found showed that there was no reasonable basis for the governor's belief that the situation demanded martial law; the court rejected the contention that the governor's order cannot be questioned because the facts justifying it are not issuable. Sterling v. Constantin, (U.S. 1932) 53 Sup. Ct. 116.

Recommended Citation

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW--DUE PROCESS--MARTIAL LAW, 31 Mich. L. Rev. 988 (1933).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol31/iss7/16