Lochner Vs. New York: A Labor Law Case

1188 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The structure of the federal court system

In short, Lochner vs New York is a labor law case, however it brings up the question of when the line should be drawn with judicial action, the interpretation of the 14th amendment, and how our constitution should be viewed. Joseph Lochner is the owner of a bakery in New York and he is charged with violating New York’s Bakeshop Act. The Bakeshop Act was enacted unanimously through New York legislation in 1895 to protect bakers. Bakers worked in dreadful conditions and often worked extensive hours. The Bakeshop Act prohibits bakers from working more than 10 hours a day and 60 hours a week, furthermore it improved working conditions for bakers. On Lochner’s first offence he was charged with allowing a worker to work more than the legal limit …show more content…

Mr. Lochner argued the Bakeshop Act was unconstitutional and violated the 14th amendment. Judicial action is used in this case by overruling New York law. The interruption of the Constitution is in regards to the due process clause. The majorities opinion was that Bakeshop Act violated the liberty and the right to contract presented in the 14th amendment. I respectfully disagree with the majorities decision and the Bakeshop Act is not unconstitutional and all criminal conviction should be upheld.

The majorities main objection with the Bakeshop Act is the act violates the liberty protected by the Fourteenth amendment. The text examined by the majority is “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or munities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. (The United States Constitution Amendment Fourteen).” The 14th amendment does not state anything about the right to contract, all it says is the state shall not deprive any person of liberty. The majority took that liberty mentioned and ran with it to offset the Bakeshop Act. It would be silly if I …show more content…

We live in a democracy and the people of New York through a democratic system enacted the Bakeshop Act unanimously in order protect bakers who were working long hours and in unsafe conditions. Justices are not elected by the will of the people, by overturning the Bake Shop act the majority is essentially undermining democracy. The beautiful thing about democracy is regardless of the time it can always take care of current values. We live in a country that is ruled by the laws and not men. The founders set it up this way, so having justice’s rules without the democratic process goes directly against the way our country was

Show More
Related

  • Employment division v. Smith, 494 U.S 872

    1621 Words  | 4 Pages

    A rehabilitation clinic dismissed two drug rehabilitation counselors for using peyote in a religious ceremony. The two counselors, including Smith, sought unemployment benefits. Possessing peyote is a criminal offense in the State of Oregon. The rehabilitation clinic denied the counselors unemployment on grounds of misconduct. Smith filed suit again the clinic. The Oregon Supreme Court overruled the rehabilitation clinic’s verdict. The court stated that Smith’s religious use of peyote was protected under the First Amendment's freedom of religion. The Employment Division, Department of Resources appealed the case to the United States Supreme Court on the grounds that possession and use of peyote is a crime. The Supreme Court returned the case back to Oregon State Courts to determine if Oregon law prohibits the use and possession of peyote for religious purposes. Oregon State court ruled that consumption of illegal drugs for religious purposes was still considered illegal; however, they were also aware that this ruling also violated the First Amendment. The main issue is whether the government can prevent the religious use of peyote under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, even if a law prohibits it for everyone else. In addition, can the state deny unemployment benefits to someone who has been fired for using peyote for religious purposes?

    Read More

  • Adair v. U.S. and Coppage v. Kansas Analysis

    654 Words  | 2 Pages

    Holmes’s dissent in Lochner, criticizes the majority for essentially creating a new right through their substantive reading of the Fourteenth. The Court, by deeming the New York Bakeshop Act unconstitutional, does not take into account the beneficial qualities of the act. For example, protecting public health and welfare and providing proper working regulations for an industry that has a substantial need for it. The Court also overlooks the fact that the Act passed with a unanimous vote in the New York legislature. The decision is also an example of the court playing the role of the legislature by basing their decision not on law but on their own personal or political beliefs. The courts judicial activism becomes the main issue with the court’s decision in Lochner which greatly influences future decisions the court makes.

    Read More

  • Judicial Review: Federalist 78, Alexander Hamilton

    1059 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Federalist 78, Alexander Hamilton argued that the Judicial Branch is the “least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution" and that it is “beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power” since it has “neither force nor will, but merely judgment.” [*] While it is true that Hamilton wrote the Federalist Papers as propaganda to garner support for the Constitution by convincing New Yorkers that it would not take away their rights and liberties, it is also true that Article III of the Constitution was deliberately vague about the powers of the Judicial Branch to allow future generations to decide what exactly those powers should be. In the 1803 case of Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice John Marshall, established the Court’s power of judicial review. However, as Jill Lepore, Harvard professor of American History, argued, “This was such an astonishing thing to do that the Court didn’t declare another federal law unconstitutional for fifty-four years” after declaring the Judicial Act of 1789 unconstitutional in Marbury v. Madison. [*Jill Lepore] Alexander Hamilton was incorrect in his assertion that the Judicial Branch is the least dangerous to political rights and the weakest of the three government branches because judicial review has made the Supreme Court more powerful than he had anticipated. From 1803 to today, the controversial practice of judicial activism in the Supreme Court has grown—as exemplified by the differing decisions in Minor v. Happersett and United States v. Virginia—which, in effect, has increased the power of the Supreme Court to boundaries beyond those that Alexander Hamilton stated in Federalist 78.

    Read More

  • Dennis v. United States, 341 U.S. 494 (1951)

    618 Words  | 2 Pages

    Analysis of Concurring Opinion- Frankfurter: The individual is not the only one who as the right to self-preservation, the government shares this right as well as it is shown through the Smith Act. Whereas the individual has a right to self-preservation, the government as well shares this right, and it is manifested in the Smith Act. Also, the Constitution does not entirely guarantee the freedom of speech which was set forth in the early years of the Constitution to prove this.

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of Federal Court Judges

    1751 Words  | 4 Pages

    It is simple to be confused by the federal court judges and their decisions and how they go about them and how they are in their position. Personally, I always thought they were elected by the Supreme Court or someone or something higher than them. But I was very surprised to know that they were appointed (assigned a job or role to). This leaves the judges from having to go through a process of campaigning and running against others. Although by being unelected officials it has both pros and cons. Pros being, that they are trusted enough to handle cases that go to this point and being able to make a decision under the law to better the society. Cons being, if a federal court judge makes any misdemeanor or crime they have the ability to be impeached

    Read More

  • The Second Challenge: Imperial Judiciary

    1279 Words  | 3 Pages

    People have always been concerned about our judicial system making massive decisions in an undemocratic manner and while there are parts of our nation’s history (Jost). There have been decisions that were dreadful for our nation, Dred Scott v. Sandford; but there are decisions that everyone can agree with in retrospect, Brown v. Board of Education. Also, there are decisions that still divide us as a nation, Bush v. Gore and Roe V. Wade. There are a lot of issues that come from our current judicial system; however, I understand that the problems that come from it are not going to come from any quick fix, and we may have to live with some of them. Looking at the history of the judicial branch of the United States Government, I believe it needs to be limited in its judicial review power, but have certain exceptions where necessary in some cases.

    Read More

  • First Amendment Rights of Public School Students

    1088 Words  | 3 Pages

    The court system has jumped back and forth throughout the years and this may seem very confusing to the average person but they’ve never changed their mind on the big cases that were said in the previous paragraph. But the court seems to be sporadic in its decisions outside of these big cases. It all starts in 1962 when they held that prayer in the public schools was a violation of the first amendment.

    Read More

  • The Court Of The Supreme Court

    2261 Words  | 5 Pages

    The Supreme Court, which sees almost 150 petitions per week, called cert petitions, must carefully select the cases that they want to spend their time and effort on (Savage 981). If they didn’t select them carefully, the nine justices would quickly be overrun, so they have put in place a program to weed through the court cases to pick out the small number they will discuss. There are a few criteria that are used to judge whether or not a case will be tried. The first is whether or not the lower courts decided the case based on another one of the Supreme Court’s decisions for they will investigate these in order to withhold or draw back their conclusion that they made in their court case. Another is the case’s party alignment: sometimes the justices will pick cases that will align with their party beliefs, like trying to get a death row inmate off of his death sentence. They also make claims about the “life” of the case- the Supreme Court only hears “live” cases- they do not try to go back in time and re-mark a case that has long since been decided (Savage 981). Lastly, they like to take cases where the lower courts did not decide with one another -these cases can have t o do with interpretations of the law that have been left up to the lower courts and should be specifically defined by the Supreme Court (Savage 982).

    Read More

  • Employment Law

    1376 Words  | 3 Pages

    The purpose of this paper is to analyze a specific, hypothetical employment situation encountered and to include the information regarding employment conflicts, questions, grievances, lawsuits, etc., in terms of how the situation was handled or resolved.  Employment conflicts are a constant issue everyday in any organization; it is how you handle them both legally and professionally that counts.

    Read More

  • U.S. Labor History

    1343 Words  | 3 Pages

    U.S. Labor History Unionism can be described as "a continuous association of wage-earners for the purpose of maintaining or improving the conditions of their employment" (Smelser). This means that a group of workers can unite to gain more power and leverage in bargaining. The bargaining process may include many aspects but usually consists of wages, benefits, terms and conditions of employment. The notion of union came about in the 1700's. In the beginning, as it is today, workers united to "defend the autonomy and dignity of the craftsman against the growing power of the company" (Montgomery).

    Read More

  • The Tinker V. Des Moines School District Case

    1304 Words  | 3 Pages

    ...ts, detailed explanation, and the First Amendment to show how the policy of the armbands goes against the First Amendment. As for Justice Hugo Black, he uses facts and other case decisions to explain why the policy is permissible under the First Amendment. Yet, Justice Black does not explain, in elaborate detail, the facts included nor a strong reasoning behind why he believes the policy is allowed. While Justice Abe Fortas and Justice Hugo Black did include strong points, Justice Abe Fortas was more convincing with his argument. For Justice Abe, every point connected, and the main points introduced were further developed through the case facts, the District Court’s decision, and other case decisions. There is a fluency that Justice Fortas had, which was not present in Justice Black’s dissenting opinion. Justice Black seemed jumpy, and his organization was confusing.

    Read More

  • Justice Fortas And Tinker V. Des Moines Case

    732 Words  | 2 Pages

    Separate but equal, judicial review, and the Miranda Rights are decisions made by the Supreme Court that have impacted the United States in history altering ways. Another notable decision was made in the Tinker v. Des Moines Case. Ultimately the Supreme Court decided that the students in the case should have their rights protected and that the school acted unconstitutionally. Justice Fortas delivered a compelling majority opinion. In the case of Tinker v Des Moines, the Supreme Court’s majority opinion was strongly supported with great reasoning but had weaknesses that could present future problems.

    Read More

  • Lifetime Tenure for Supreme Court Justices

    1624 Words  | 4 Pages

    The Honorable Jonathan Yates, former deputy general counsel for the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight of the U. S. House of Representatives, writes, “This lifetime term now enjoyed by justices not only contravenes the spirit of the Constitution, it counters the role intended for the court as a minor player in the equal judiciary branch of government. Term limits are needed to adjust the part of the court to the intent of the founding fathers” (Np). Judge Yates explains that the greatest powers of the Supreme Court did not originate from the Constitution or Congress, but from their own rulings (Np). The most prominent of which, was being Marbury v. Madison, in which the court granted itself judicial review, or the power to determine the constitutionality of legislation (Yates). Furthermore, the intended role of the court by the founding fathers was so small, that it did not have a home, or meet to hear any cases (Yates). An amendment to the Constitution removing the lifetime tenure of U.S. Supreme Court judges needs consideration by Congress. Lifetime tenure on the U.S. Supreme Court has led to four points that could not have been foreseen by the creators of the Constitution. The first problem resulting from the Supreme Court’s tenure policy is that judges’ are holding on to their seats, disregarding debilitating health issues. The second issue that has arisen from lifetime tenure is the use of strategic retirement by sitting judges to ensure a like-minded replacement. The third development resulting from lifetime tenure is the steady decrease in case decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court. The fourth and final effect lifetime tenure has had on the Supreme Court is an increase in celebrity status of the judges, which has le...

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of Judicial Review

    1015 Words  | 3 Pages

    views as to whether or not Judicial review, and the Supreme Court as a whole,

    Read More

  • Life Tenure Essay

    734 Words  | 2 Pages

    Justices should take care of themselves than going to their job everyday to take care of cases. They can suffer from alzheimer’s, which can make them forget rules, parkinson’s, which can be severe enough for a caretaker and 24/7 watch, respiratory problems, or many other things. A lot of health problems need someone to remind them when to take their medicine or help them get things. Sometimes, their health problems can lead to death.

    Read More

More about Lochner Vs. New York: A Labor Law Case

Open Document