Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Community
»
The Flameboard
»
May it be!
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by David Sands: [QB] Lee: let me quote from my Emmanuel's Constitutional Law what I think they might like to see more of in modern juriprudence [QUOTE] Close fit: First, [the majority opinion] required a very close "fit" between the staute and its objectives. In the majority's words, there had to be a "real and substantial" relationship between the statute and the goals which it was to serve. This tight fit was absent in Lochner because bakers could have been protected by less restrictive measures, e.g., more frequent inspections, required bathrooms, etc. Limited objectives: Second, only certain legislative objectives were acceptable. Regulation of health and safety was permissible, but readjustment of economic power or economic resources was not. Thus, to the extent that the NY law in Lochner was merely a "labor law" which readjusted bargaining power, rather than a true health regulation, it served an impermissible objective.[/QUOTE]No serious scholar today doubts that safety regulations like that in Lochner were good, it's more a question of whether such regulation was closet econo-industrial tinkering. I think that's what they don't like. It goes along with their opinion of the Commerce Clause jurisprudence from the 1930s to the 1990s. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3