General Motors Corporation v. Evert Romein
503 U.S. 181 · Decided March 9, 1992 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
General Motors Corporation v. Evert Romein was decided on March 9, 1992 unanimously (9–0). The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “State or local business regulation” in the Economic Activity area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 503 U.S. 181 · 112 S. Ct. 1105 · 117 L. Ed. 2d 328 · 1992 U.S. LEXIS 1535
- Docket number
- 90-1390
- Decided
- March 9, 1992
- Argued
- December 10, 1991
- Court era
- Rehnquist Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 9–0 (unanimous)
- Majority opinion
- Sandra Day O'Connor
- Opinion assigned by
- William H. Rehnquist
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- State or local business regulation
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Legal provision
- Article I, Section 10, Paragraph 1 (contract clause)
- Type of law
- Constitution
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Liberal what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Majority | |
| Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Majority | |
| Justice Sandra Day O'Connor | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Antonin Scalia | Majority | |
| Justice Anthony M. Kennedy | Majority | |
| Justice David H. Souter | Majority | |
| Justice Clarence Thomas | Majority |
Full case caption
General Motors Corporation, et al. v. Evert Romein et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1991-042, docket 1991-042-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “State or local business regulation”
- Fort Gratiot Sanitary Landfill, Inc. v. Michigan Department of Natural ResourcesLaw held unconstitutional
- C & a Carbone, Inc. v. Town of ClarkstownLaw held unconstitutional
- Healy v. the Beer InstituteAltered precedentLaw held unconstitutional
- Northwest Central Pipeline Corp. v. State Corporation Commission of Kansas
- CTS Corp. v. Dynamics Corporation of America
- Maine v. Taylor
Cases on the same legal provision: Article I, Section 10, Paragraph 1 (contract clause)
Same Term, same area (Economic Activity)
- Southwest Marine, Inc. v. Byron Gizoni
- Union Bank v. Herbert Wolas
- Kenneth Hilton v. South Carolina Public Railways Commission
- Hunter v. Bryant
- Shirley M. Molzof v. United States
- Aletha Dewsnup v. Louis L. Timm
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error