Lochner v. New York

Definition

Lochner v. New York is a landmark Supreme Court case from 1905 that invalidated a New York law setting maximum working hours for bakers, ruling that it violated the liberty of contract under the Fourteenth Amendment. This decision is significant because it reflects the court's stance on economic rights and personal freedoms during a time when labor regulations were on the rise, illustrating a balance between judicial activism and restraint in interpreting the Constitution.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. The case arose when Joseph Lochner was fined for violating New York's Bakeshop Act, which limited bakers to a 60-hour work week.
2. The Supreme Court's 5-4 decision held that the Bakeshop Act interfered with the right to freely contract and was therefore unconstitutional.
3. Justice Rufus Peckham wrote the majority opinion, emphasizing economic liberties over state intervention in labor matters.
4. Lochner v. New York is often cited as an example of judicial activism during the Lochner era, where courts prioritized contract rights over social legislation.
5. The ruling was eventually undermined by later cases that upheld regulations on working conditions, leading to a shift away from the principles established in Lochner.

Review Questions

• How did the Supreme Court justify its decision in Lochner v. New York regarding individual rights and government regulation?
  • The Supreme Court justified its decision by arguing that the liberty of contract was a fundamental right protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. The majority opinion asserted that individuals should be free to negotiate their work conditions without excessive government interference, viewing the Bakeshop Act as an overreach of state power. This rationale positioned economic rights as paramount during this era, reflecting a significant moment of judicial activism.
• In what ways did Lochner v. New York reflect the broader trends of judicial activism or restraint in early 20th-century America?
  • Lochner v. New York epitomized judicial activism by prioritizing individual contract rights over state regulation intended to protect workers' welfare. The Court's willingness to invalidate legislation aimed at improving labor conditions indicated a preference for minimal governmental intervention in economic affairs. This approach contrasted with later developments where courts began to show restraint, accepting more government regulation aimed at addressing social issues such as labor rights and public health.
• Critically evaluate how Lochner v. New York has influenced contemporary discussions about workers' rights and government regulation in labor markets.
  • Lochner v. New York has had lasting implications for contemporary discussions surrounding workers' rights and government regulation. The case established a precedent for viewing contracts as inviolable agreements, impacting how courts approach labor laws today. Critics argue that this case set back social reforms by emphasizing individual liberties at the expense of collective worker protections, leading to ongoing debates about balancing economic freedoms with the need for regulations that safeguard workers' health and safety in today's labor market.

Related terms

Liberty of Contract: The legal principle that individuals have the freedom to enter into contracts without undue interference from the government.

Fourteenth Amendment: An amendment to the U.S. Constitution that grants citizenship rights and equal protection under the law, often used in cases involving civil rights.

Judicial Activism: A judicial philosophy where judges are more willing to interpret the law and the Constitution in a way that may reflect their personal views, often leading to broader interpretations of rights.