Lochner and Post Lochner Era Flashcards
During the Lochner Era, states were alllowed to regulate econonomically only if 2 things rang true?
- Was a compelling state interest AND
- the regulation was necessary to achieve that purpose
Explain Lochner v. NY
Bakers were working in horrible conditions. NY statute imposed limitations on hours to address public health issue.
What was the issue in Lochner?
Whether a particular provision of the Bake Shop Act which limited max number of hours that employees could work was a valid exercise of NY police power or a violation of liberty protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
Holding in Lochner
Strikes down the act because the liberty prong of DPC grants fundamental right of freedom to contract
Was there a compelling state interest in Lochner?
No - work of baker is not particularly unhealthy so there is no need for the state to regulate with police power. Fit of interest is not tight enough.
Harlan Dissent in Lochner
Liberty of contract under the DPC exists but is subordinate to state’s police power. State police power extends to public health concerns so we should defer to the states on state needs for its citizens.
Holmes Dissent in Lochner
state right to interfere with work limits is already well esetablished.
What is lochnerizing
when a court determines that an unenumerated right is fundamental, court acts like a super legislature or engages in judicial activism in the context of unenumerated rights
Explain Muller v. oregon
state statute that placed limits on women working. Upheld statute because factual evidence showed women’s physical structure justified legislation because women were put at a disadvantage and legislation was necessary to protect equality.
What case was an outlier for lochnerizing?
Muller v. Oregon
Bunting v. Oregon
Court upheld statute establishing maximum ten hour day for factory workers of both sexes
Adkins v. Children’s Hospital
state statute establishing minimum wages for women. This was struck down because it interfered with the right to contract.
rational basis rview
lowest level of review and the court is going to defer to state legislatures and assume that state legislatures had the facts at hand and make a decision for the state. Court is going to assume that state did the right thing as long as there is no reason to believe that it acted in a way that was capricious, discriminatory or unreasonable AND there is some connection between what that state action does and what the issue is that the state is trying to solve.
Nebbia v NY
Gov regulation fixes milk prices and Nebbia is convicted of selling cheap milk.
Holding in Nebbia
State is free to adopt and enforce economic policy reasonably deemed to promote public welfare. Needs to have a real and substantial relation to the object it is seeking to be attained.
Explain West Coast Hotel Co v. Parrish
state law regulating minimum wage for women and plaintiff brought suit to recover money she was not paid.
Holding in West Coast Hotel
overruled Adkins and upheld state law. The constitution does not speak of a freedom to contract so this does not violate DPC. There is a compelling state interest and a reasonable means end.
Explain US v. Carolene Products.
Filled milk act of 1923 prohibited interstate filled milk shipment claiming it is bad for health.
When it is an act from Congress - what amendment do we look at
5th amendment because that is federal due process
When it is an act from the state, what amendment do we look at
14th amendment
Holding in US v. Carolene
Upheld the act by applying rational basis review. No need for a heavy strict review, state saw a problem and enacted legislation to solve it. As long as there is a set of known facts then its fine.
Footnote 4 in Carolene Products
Courts should generally presume that laws are constitutional. A more searching judicial inquiry is appropriate when it is a law that interferes with individual rights or restricts the ability of the political process to repeal undesirable legislation or discriminates against minorities.
Explain Williamson v. Lee Optical
state statute made it unlawful for optician to fit lenses without a prescription from an opthalmologist or an optometrist.
holding in Williamson v. Lee Optical
UPHELD statute. Court hypothesized a reason for why Congress enacted the law. As long as there is a set of known or hypothetical facts then it is fine. Court now can always hypothesize an explanation or even a justification for state action.
Explain Ferguson v. Skrupa
state statute prohibited person from being debt adjuster and put Skrupa out of business.
holding in Ferguson v. Skrupa
UPHELD statute. state is free to decide for itself what legislation was needed to deal with issues. As long as there is a reasonable fit between the means and the ends of the law, then it’s fine. Court also assumes that the means that the state takes fit the problem they are trying to solve.
Explain Meyer v. Nebraska
State law made it a crime for language other than English to be taught in schools.
Holding in Meyer v. Nebraska
STRUCK DOWN. Liberty is a lot of things including freedom to engage in occupations of life. Parents have a right to direct the educational upbringing of their children and it is not harmful for children to learn more than one language.
Explain Pierce v. Society of Sisters
Statute mandated that children had to attend the public school within their zone of residence.
Holding in Pierce v. Society of Sisters
STRUCK DOWN. It unreasonably interfered with the liberty of parents and guardians to direct the upbringing and education of children under their control.
