A Case which needs to be reinstated - The SCOTUS Lochner decision - Galt's Gulch

Remove this ad.

2

A Case which needs to be reinstated - The SCOTUS Lochner decision

Posted by blarman 9 years, 3 months ago to History

2 comments | Share | Flag

Though I would have ruled for Lochner based on freedom of association rather than equal protection (First Amendment rather than Fourteenth Amendment), Lochner is a court decision that needs to be reinstated.

SOURCE URL: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/capitalism/landmark_lochner.html

Add Comment

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

1

Posted by blarman 9 years, 3 months ago

A contract is an association. It isn't property. A contract can't be taken away by the courts - only declared unenforceable. Thus there is no requirement for the government to remunerate on contract disputes (unless it is a party). You might argue that everyone should be treated the same, but the law struck down by Lochner would have done that - it just established an arbitrary hour cap for work.

As you point out, one can make the case that the Fourteenth provides jurisdiction, but I would argue that the First provides a more solid protection for business.

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink

1

Posted by Zenphamy 9 years, 3 months ago

I don't understand the 'freedom of association' argument vs. freedom to contract and due process. How do you get 1st Amend. protection to employment conditions? Wouldn't 14th have to be involved in either case to establish SCOTUS jurisdiction?

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink

Comment hidden.