Lochner v New York
Joseph Lochner was arrested in 1899 for violating the Bakeshop Act, which required bakery employees to work no more than 10 hours a day or 60 hours in a week. This was his second offense, and he appealed to multiple New York courts that affirmed the conviction. He then appealed to the Supreme Court, saying that the Due Process Clause–which the Court interpreted as protecting the “liberty of contract”–allowed employers and employees to agree to such working hours as long as the employee contracted to said hours.
Breakdown Verdict.
A close verdict of 5-4 struck down the Bakeshop Act and acquitted Lochner of his previous charges. Led by Justice Rufus Peckham, the majority opinion cited a key part of the Due Process Clause: “The general right to make a contract in relation to his business is part of the liberty of the individual protected by the Fourteenth Amendment”. They also mentioned how the job of a baker was not dangerous enough that it would justify such a level of state regulation. The dissent argued that the law was a reasonable exercise of the state’s police power to protect workers’ health and safety.
Result Going Forward.
With this ruling came the name of the Lochner era, which was a time where the Supreme Court overruled many state regulations and initially turned away from progressive labor and economic regulations such as child labor prevention, minimum wage, insurance, banking regulation, and many other working conditions. Today, many legal scholars view the decision as an example of the Court reading economic policy preferences into the Constitution.This ruling is widely frowned upon because it goes against the protectionist policies that characterize modern constitutional and labor law.
Do you agree with the verdict?
100%
0%