Lochner V New York

1064 Words5 Pages
Lochner v. New York Paul Kens on p. 5 of his book, Lochner v New York: Economic Regulation on Trial, writes that that the Supreme Court’s decision in Lochner v New York “did not represent an instance of the Court’s enforcing economic policy rather than moral principle. Nor did it represent a clash between labor and the captains of industry. Rather, the conflict was one of conflicting ideals.” Explain what Kens means by this statement. What were these “conflicting ideals? Who held them and why? How did the Supreme Court choose from among them and why? What were the effects of this choice? The Lochner case is one of great significance because it deals with such issues as police powers, Laissez-Faire ideal, and due process. The Bakeshop Act regulated the amount of hours that bakery employees were allowed to work and restricted them to ten hours per day and sixty hours per week. New York’s highest court upheld the law and Joseph Lochner took his case to the Supreme Court (Irons 255). The state of New York exercised its police powers in order to “protect working people against low wages, long hours, and unsafe and unhealthy ‘sweatshop’ conditions” (Irons 254). This case deals with Lochner’s Home bakery owner, Joseph Lochner appealing his $50 fine for violating the Bakeshop Act. It all began with a baker, Aman Schmitter who Lochner allowed to work more for than sixty hours in a week. The New York law stated, “that no employee ‘shall be required, permitted or suffered’…” to work such hours (Kens 89). Lochner argued that the Bakeshop Act interfered with his ability to contract freely with his employees regarding wage and hours. He also argued that this act was in violation of “the right of one to use his faculties in lawful ways, to earn a livelihood in any lawful calling, to pursue any lawful trade or avocation, [that] are infringement upon his fundamental

More about Lochner V New York

Open Document