Class Notes (836,148)
United States (324,358)
Boston College (3,565)
Law (20)
LAWS 2180 (18)
Lecture

American Constitutional and Legal History 13.docx

4 Pages
118 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Law
Course
LAWS 2180
Professor
Alan Rogers
Semester
Spring

Description
New State Ice Co V. Liebmann (1932) • Context: Great Depression • Oklahoma tried to reduce the number of people who produce ice to drive up the price: create a monopoly • “Francis: the business couldn’t go under the marginal cost or they would lose profit so wont this not be a problem” Professor: “… sure…” Rob: “shut up Francis” • Police Power used by the State because in the best interest of the public. • Munn v. Illinois (1876) is the predecessor and the state used police power for interest of public = it was ok because the sale of grain was affected by the public interest so the private business can be regulated by state. This argument is discarded later because the public interest can be found in every item so can’t be used. • Majority says that it can’t do it because states cannot regulate private business and it is not in public. • Brandies dissent: we should let the state decide because we need to have the court do less in the business in regulating the economy and allow experimentation to fix our country. It was the first step to making court draw out of economy regulation business Nebbia V. New York (1934) • The heart of the great depression • New York established base price of which it can be sold = state regulated private business: police power for the protection of the public interest. th • Nebbia argued 14 amendment and substantive due process on his right to set his own prices • Rule of reason here: reasonable choice case by case kinda deal Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States (1935) • NRAgoal: to set prices everywhere nationally in order to set prices higher prices it would bring about a rise in the economy in the future and create more jobs. • Court ruled this unconstitutional because the president had the power to set prices (which he doesn’t know anything about) and he doesn’t have that power = violates the separation of powers. Fundamental violation. • Government says they can regulate this because swift v. u.s. said that the federal
More Less

Related notes for LAWS 2180

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit