1. SCOTUS has shown throughout the years that it is adept at marshalling its judicial power and using it deftly while simultaneously understanding that it’s power can be limited by its co-equal branches. To protect its judicial power, the Court has been cognizant of the impact of its decisions and its own acceptance, and even popularity. See David Dalition, Adv. Con Law Note Judicial Review, Walking a Fine Line. Each time the Court overturns a law passed by the democratically elected legislature, it is in effect, overturning the will of the voters. See David Dalition, Adv. Con Law Note Judicial Review, Walking a Fine Line. Of course, as we have discussed, the Constitution, is the supreme charter of our system and any law that violates the founding charter must be nullified via the Court’s power of judicial review.
2. The Court’s handling of economic due process provides insight into the above and our recent discussions. Be prepared to discuss Lochner v. New York, and its significance.
In a 5 to 4 holding, the Court nullified a New York law that aimed to safeguard the health of bakers’ by prohibiting them from being worked for more than 10 hours a day or 60 hours each week. The court found that the law violated the Due Process Clause as an unreasonable, unnecessary and arbitrary interreference with the right of employees to contract for hours that they desired to work. Be prepared to discuss in detail how the court defined “liberty” in Lochner and compare that to the Court’s modern definition of “liberty”. See David Dalition, Adv. Con Law, Economic and Substantive Due Process. Does the word liberty appear anywhere in the US Constitution? What formed the basis of the Court’s decision to overturn the New York law that appeared to be a reasonable attempt to provide an upper limit to the demands upon which employers could work their employees? What do you believe motivated the Court’s decision? One of the aims of the law was to protect the health of bakers, which allegedly suffered due to their often extremely long shifts. Why did the Court find that New York’s law was unfair, unreasonable, and inappropriate? What did the Court say that New York could have done to protect bakers’ health besides this legislation which unconstitutionally infringed upon the liberty to contract? The holding of the case might be summarized as any legislation that interferes with the liberty to contract violates the Due Process Clause unless the legislation is necessary to directly further an important government objective. See David Dalition, Adv. Con Law, Economic and Substantive Due Process. Was the Court’s emphasis on freedom to contract consistent with the economic milieu of the day? What was the reaction of New York? The federal government? Be prepared to discuss Adkins v. Children’s Hospital.
3. Be prepared to discuss Justice Harlan’s dissenting opinion and whether you agree or disagree with it. We will also discuss Muller v. Oregon and you will be required to write a one-page analysis of Muller in light of Lochner. Do you believe New York’s law was an arbitrary and capricious interference with the liberty to contract? Why or why not? Some have argued that the Court used raw power to substitute its policy preferences for that of the legislature. Do you agree or disagree? When is it legitimate for the Court to overturn the democratically passed laws of the legislature? See David Dalition, Adv. Con Law Note Judicial Review, Walking a Fine Line. Does it make a difference if the liberty to contract is explicitly protected in the constitution? Why or why not?
4. Did the Court attribute illicit motives to the legislature for passing the law? Explain what in the decision forms the basis of your opinion. Finally, how did the Court’s opinion impact the bargaining power of employers and employees?
