Barron sued the city for taking property without just compensation in violation of the 5th Amendment.
Contended that the city ruined his wharf by diverting streams, and thereby making the water too shallow for boats.
Procedural History
None given.
Issues
Does the Takings Clause of the 5th Amendment apply to the City of Baltimore?
Holding/Rule
The 5th Amendment restrains the power of the general government, and is not applicable to the states.
Reasoning
The Constitution was ordained and established by the people of the United States for themselves, for their own government, and not for the government of the individual states.
Each state established a constitution for itself.
The 5th Amendment restrains the power of the general government, not as applicable to the states.
The purpose was to stop abuse of power by the federal government, and nothing in them indicates that they should apply to the states.
Dissent
None.
Notes
At the time of the decision, Barron made sense because of faith in state constitutions and because of the shared understanding that the Bill of Rights was meant to apply only to the states. People didn't worry that the states were going to get too much power and violate individual rights.
