Lochner v. New York
Main Points
Mr. Justice Peckham
1. The Labor law impedes a citizen’s right of contract between employers
and employees and does so without ‘due process.’ This violates rights
protected in the 14th Amendment. It places the liberty of the individual of the
will of the majority.
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 of the
Federal Constitution. Allgeyer v. Louisiana. Under that provision, no State
can deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of
law. The right to purchase or to sell labor is part of the liberty protected by
this amendment.
2. This ruling places a limit on the powers of the State. It makes states
subordinate to the constitution of the federal government and draws a limit
on the ‘implied police powers’ of the states. It also tries to curtail the will of
the majority at the benefit of individual’s rights.
We think the limit of the police power has been reached and passed in this
case. If this statute be valid, and if, therefore, a proper case is made out in
which to deny the right of an individual… to make contract for the labor of
the latter under the protection of the provisions of the Federal Constitution,
there would seem to be no length to which legislation of this nature might
not go.
Mr. Justices Harlan and Holmes
1. Both agreed that the law was enacted, by ‘majority’ legislators, to protect
employees well being. The health and safety of the people of a state are the
responsibility for that state to guard and protect, not the federal
government’s. This subordinated the Constitution’s authority to the power of
the States.
Our duty is to sustain the statute as not being in conflict with the Federal
Constitution, for the reason-and such is an all-sufficient reason-it is not
shown to be plainly and palpably inconsistent with that instrument. Let the
State alone in the management of its purely domestic affairs…
2. The majority has the right to embody its opinion in law.
I strongly believe that my agreement or disagreement has nothing to do with
the right of a majority to embody their opinions in law… The liberty of the
citizen to do as he likes so long as he does not interfere with the liberty of
others to do the same, which has been a shibboleth for some well-known
writer, is interfered with by school laws, the post Office, by every state or
municipal institution which takes his money for purposes thought desirable,
whether he likes it or not.