Slaughterhouse Cases, Takings Clause
PART I Slaughterhouse Cases
198 U.S. 45 Lochner v New York 1904 (Oyez, 2013)
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT
Joseph Lochner
The People of the State of New York
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
FACTS -- Lochner was convicted but he appealed to the Supreme Court and argued that the bakery labor law interfered with an employee's liberty to contract as guaranteed by the 14th Amendment.. The employee has the right to substantive due process of law.
A state law did not allow workers in the bakery business to work longer than 60 hours a week, willingly or not. Is this law consistent with the 14th Amendment? If so, which should prevail -- the citizens' right to contract the length of work hours or the state's right to control work hours?
ARGUMENT -- In a 5-4 decision, Justice Rufus Peckham ruled the Bakeshop Act was unconstitutional and reversed Lochner's conviction. The Bakeshop Act was an absolute interference t the employee and employer's right to contract. Justice Peckham declared the right to contract as part of the liberty of the individual, which is guaranteed and protected by the 14th Amendment. The Amendment's Due Process Clause prevents the State from depriving an individual of life, liberty or property without due process. The individual right to sell or buy labor is protected by the Amendment. In addition, the bakery industry, unlike the mining industry, was not an unhealthy trade that must be subjected to the state's police powers (Oyez).
291 U.S. 502 1934
HUGHES COURT
Nebbia v New York (LII, 2013; Oyez, 2013)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
FACTS -- Nebbia, a store owner, was convicted for selling milk below the set minimum retail price of 9 cents. New York legislators perceived the critical state of milk at that time as leading farmers to cut the prices of milk among distributors. The legislators thus passed the Act to regulate milk prices.
ISSUE -- Was this Act constitutional? Did it violate the 14th Amendment, as in the Lochner's case?
ARGUMENT -- . The objective of the Act is to prevent competition from destroying the wholesale price structure of a product on which farmers depended for their livelihood as well assuring the community's continued supply of milk. The Court determined that the guarantee of due process requires that the law is not unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious and that the means to attain it shall be genuinely and substantially related to the object. The State's police power is intended to assure the public good. But the public good does not seem at risk in this particular case. Lochner's case would not allow the government to interfere with the private contract between employer and employee. But that interference was warranted if the contract affected public interest. The Court ruled that the Act was not a regulation and price controls were not "arbitrary, discriminatory" r clearly irrelevant in affecting general welfare. As such, it was consistent with the Constitution (Oyez, LII).
372 U.S. 726 1963
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT
Ferguson v Skrupa (Oyez, 2013)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
FACTS -- Under a Kansas statute, engaging in the business of debt adjusting was a misdemeanor, except when it was incident to the lawful practice of law. This statute was challenged as a violation of the Due Process Clause of the 14h Amendment. Debt adjusting means coming to an agreement with a debtor who pays a person engaged in credit adjusting to distribute the money to creditors according to a set plan. States have the power to legislate against what it considers injurious practices in the commercial and business affairs of their jurisdiction, as long as there is no conflict between specific federal constitutional prohibits or some other valid federal law.
ISSUE -- Did the Kansas status violate the Due Process Clause of the Constitution?
ARGUMENT -- A state legislature can do what it sees fit unless restrained by an express provision in the Constitution or the State itself. The Courts should not extend the prohibition beyond their intended and obvious meaning. The doctrine applied to Lochner and other similar cases has been superseded by a return to the original Constitutional proposition. This was that courts do not substitute their social and economic beliefs for the judgment reached by legislative bodies the people elect to pass laws. Legislative bodies possess the broad scope over economic problems. States have the power to legislate against whatever they find injurious to their internal commercial and business affairs as long as their laws do not violate...
BUSINESS LAW Business Law: Case Law Analysis- Tort LawStep 1: Information Literacy SkillsParties before the court: Wael Musa (Plaintiff) vs. Carleton Condominium Corporation no. 255 (Defendant) (CanLii, 2022)Date of decision: 18-27 October 2021.Court: Superior Court of Justice- Ontario.Step 2: Summarizing FactsThe incident occurred in December 2016 when the plaintiff fell off the slippery area outside the roadway of a condominium in Ottawa (Berman, 2022). The accident resulted in his ankle
The legal issue in question revolved around the terms of the Truth in Negotiations Act (TINA) which demands that pricing be based upon fair market value. The government stated that TINA applies to all contact negotiations regarding all essential medical services. Additionally, under the Christian precedent, contract clauses that express a "significant or deeply ingrained strand of public procurement policy" are automatically understood to be in all government contacts, even
search and seizure laws. The writer uses several cases to present a detailed exploration of search and seizure laws and how the courts rule when they are challenged. There were five sources used to complete this paper. The Constitution of the United States provides protection from illegal search and seizures through the fourth amendment. The fourth amendment is written in such a way that it can be vague when it
criminal case brief; the case under study is the Sullateskee vs. Oklahoma State case. An analysis will follow to ascertain if the key issue, in regard to the verdict, was Mens Rea or Actus Reus. Actus Reus and Mens Rea The Latin term Actus Reus means "the guilty act." In simple terms, it implies the physical deed of perpetrating a criminal offense. On the other hand, the Latin term Mens Rea
Statute and Case Law Relationship In Cloutier v. Costco, 390 F3d. 126 (2004), Kimberly Cloutier alleged that her employer, Costco Wholesale Corp, failed to offer her a reasonable accommodation after she informed it to a conflict between the "no facial jewelry" provision of its dress code and her religious practice as a member of the Church of Body Modification (CBM) (Body piercing, religion and the workplace, 2005). She argues that this
Law and Philosophy Holmes' "bad man" theory offers insight into the difference between the law and morality. The bad man is not concerned with morality but he is as concerned about the law as any "good" man because in knowing the law, he can avoid getting into trouble. The bad man would lie, cheat, and/or steal if it weren't against the law because he cares not for the morals that underlie
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now