## Facts

- Congress enacted the Act of Mar. 2, 1895, making it a crime to carry lottery tickets or similar instruments from one state to another.
- Charles F. Champion, an express carrier, was federally indicted in the Northern District of Texas for conspiring to violate the Act by arranging shipment of lottery tickets from Texas to California.
- Champion was arrested in Chicago under a warrant on the Texas indictment and held by John C. Ames, a United States Marshal.
- Champion sought a writ of habeas corpus in the federal circuit court in Illinois, arguing the federal lottery statute exceeded Congress’s constitutional authority.
- The circuit court dismissed the petition; Champion appealed directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.

## Issues

1. Whether lottery tickets transported across state lines are articles of commerce subject to regulation under the Commerce Clause.
2. Whether Congress’s power to “regulate” interstate commerce includes authority to prohibit the interstate carriage of particular items.
3. Whether prohibiting interstate transportation of lottery tickets is an impermissible exercise of a general federal police power over public morals reserved to the states.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of the habeas petition and upheld the 1895 statute (5–4).
- The Court held that lottery tickets are subjects of traffic with recognized value and therefore articles of commerce.
- The Court held that transporting lottery tickets from one state to another constitutes interstate commerce.
- The Court held that Congress’s commerce power is complete within its sphere and may be exercised through measures that operate as prohibitions.
- The Court rejected the claim that the statute invaded state authority over internal affairs, reasoning that the law targeted interstate movement rather than intrastate sale or possession.

## Legal Principles

- Items bought and sold in interstate channels, including lottery tickets, may be treated as articles of commerce for Commerce Clause purposes.
- Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce may include banning specified articles from interstate carriage when Congress deems the traffic harmful.
- The Constitution does not guarantee a right to use interstate commerce channels for every form of traffic; Congress may exclude certain traffic from those channels.
- A federal prohibition directed at interstate transportation does not become unconstitutional merely because it supports state efforts to suppress activities viewed as harmful to public morals.

## Conclusion

The Court sustained federal authority to prohibit the interstate transportation of lottery tickets, reasoning that such tickets are articles of commerce and that congressional “regulation” of interstate commerce may take the form of prohibition without converting the statute into a general federal police power.


Champion v. Ames, 188 U.S. 321 (1903)