Schechter Poultry Corporation vs. United States(1935)
What are the main facts?
General Facts:
endangered peoples rights of life liberty and property
declared the New Deal unconstitutional
regulated weekly employment, hours, wages, and minimum age of workers
occurred during the Great Depression
NIRA (National Industrial Recovery Act) has eight articles entitled
(1) purposes (2) definitions (3) hours (4) wages (5) general labor provisions (6) administrations (7) trade practice (8) general
external image NRA.gif
Photo Caption: "In 1935, the Supreme Court abolished the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA), a cornerstone of the New Deal. The NRA was the major part in the National Industrial Recovery Act (June 1933), which authorized the president to issue industry-wide codes intended to eliminate unfair trade practices, reduce unemployment, establish minimum wages and maximum hours, and guarantee the right of labor to bargain collectively. The Court said, by a unanimous vote, that Congress had given the president and industries too much legislative power. It also found that NIRA’s “codes of fair practice” went beyond the regulation of interstate commerce in attempting to control intrastate activity. However, the National Labor Relations Act (1935), act passed after NIRA, proved acceptable to the court."
What Federal/State law, provion or policy is involved?
The National Industrial Recovery Act, which authorized the president to issue industry-wide codes intended to eliminate unfair trade practices, reduce unemployment, establish minimum wages and maximum hours, and guarantee the right of labor to bargain collectively.
What section(s) or amendment(s) to the Constitution are involved?
Article One of the Constitustion and the tenth and fifth amendment were violated in this court case. The First article states that there is a seperation of powers and the legislative branch is the section of government which created laws then the president approves or vetos laws. President Roosevelt and his team in the execuative branch worked together to create the New Deal and creating a set of laws to regulate buissness wage, hours, general labor provisions, and administaraion. The fifth admentment states that all people have the right of life liberty and property. The owners of Schechter Poultry Corp was not paying his workers a fair amount of money for the amount of hours they were working. In the middle of the Great Depression, companies depriving people fair amounts of money was a very big deal bevause they were deprived everything life had to offer. With no money people could not buy food for their starving families.
What specific language from #3 applies to your case?Article one of the US Constitution was violated when President Roosevelt created the New Deal. Article one states that all legislative power to be vested in the congress meaning that the executive branch does not have to power to create and pass laws. The legislative branch has to come up with the laws and then the executive branch can either pass or veto laws. This action by the President was deemed unconstitutional because of separation of powers.
What is the issue(s) in this case? Whether or not...
The main issues in this case was the rights of the workers and them receive no pay during the Great Depression. Another issue was the way in which the Schechter company inspected the chickens to see if they were good enough for the public to eat, in this process they sold "sick chickens" that where unfitted to eat for the american public.
What precedent case(s) support your side?
"In 1886, for example, the court killed an act of the illinois legislature seeking to prohibit discriminatory railroad rates, congress almost immediately passed the Interstate Commerce Act, thus definitely bringing common carriers under national control. This control has been since extended to include regulation not only of interstate but of intra-state rates as well." (C.B and Q vs. Wise)
external image 1936-new-deal.gif
What did the Supreme Court decide?
That is was unconstitutional to hold workers under conditions not suted to the rights and not give them pay. Also the Schechter company was also charged with not inspecting the chickens that was prosseced in the factory.
The supreme court ruled in favor of Congress this was decided because the company violated the 10th and 5th amendment. The 10th amendenment states "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." and The 5th amendment states "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
What are the main facts?
General Facts:- endangered peoples rights of life liberty and property
- declared the New Deal unconstitutional
- regulated weekly employment, hours, wages, and minimum age of workers
- occurred during the Great Depression
- NIRA (National Industrial Recovery Act) has eight articles entitled
(1) purposes(2) definitions
(3) hours
(4) wages
(5) general labor provisions
(6) administrations
(7) trade practice
(8) general
Photo Caption: "In 1935, the Supreme Court abolished the National Industrial Recovery Act
(NIRA), a cornerstone of the New Deal. The NRA was the major part in the National Industrial Recovery Act (June 1933), which authorized the president to issue industry-wide
codes intended to eliminate unfair trade practices, reduce unemployment, establish minimum wages and maximum hours, and guarantee the right of labor to bargain
collectively. The Court said, by a unanimous vote, that Congress had given the president and industries too much legislative power. It also found that NIRA’s “codes of fair
practice” went beyond the regulation of interstate commerce in attempting to control intrastate activity. However, the National Labor Relations Act (1935), act passed after NIRA, proved acceptable to the court."
What Federal/State law, provion or policy is involved?
The National Industrial Recovery Act, which authorized the president to issue industry-wide codes intended to eliminate unfair trade practices, reduce unemployment, establishminimum wages and maximum hours, and guarantee the right of labor to bargain collectively.
What section(s) or amendment(s) to the Constitution are involved?
Article One of the Constitustion and the tenth and fifth amendment were violated in this court case. The First article states that there is a seperation of powers and thelegislative branch is the section of government which created laws then the president approves or vetos laws. President Roosevelt and his team in the execuative branch worked
together to create the New Deal and creating a set of laws to regulate buissness wage, hours, general labor provisions, and administaraion. The fifth admentment states that all
people have the right of life liberty and property. The owners of Schechter Poultry Corp was not paying his workers a fair amount of money for the amount of hours they were
working. In the middle of the Great Depression, companies depriving people fair amounts of money was a very big deal bevause they were deprived everything life had to offer.
With no money people could not buy food for their starving families.
What specific language from #3 applies to your case?Article one of the US Constitution was violated when President Roosevelt created the New Deal. Article one states that all legislative power to be vested in the congress
meaning that the executive branch does not have to power to create and pass laws. The legislative branch has to come up with the laws and then the executive branch can
either pass or veto laws. This action by the President was deemed unconstitutional because of separation of powers.
What is the issue(s) in this case? Whether or not...
The main issues in this case was the rights of the workers and them receive no pay during the Great Depression. Another issue was the way in which the Schechter company inspected the chickens to see if they were good enough for the public to eat, in this process they sold "sick chickens" that where unfitted to eat for the american public.What precedent case(s) support your side?
"In 1886, for example, the court killed an act of the illinois legislature seeking to prohibit discriminatory railroad rates, congress almost immediately passed the Interstate Commerce Act, thus definitely bringing common carriers under national control. This control has been since extended to include regulation not only of interstate but of intra-state rates as well." (C.B and Q vs. Wise)What did the Supreme Court decide?
That is was unconstitutional to hold workers under conditions not suted to the rights and not give them pay. Also the Schechter company was also charged with not inspecting the chickens that was prosseced in the factory.Why did the Supreme court decide as it did?
The supreme court ruled in favor of Congress this was decided because the company violated the 10th and 5th amendment. The 10th amendenment states "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." and
The 5th amendment states "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."