eDiscovery, legal research and legal memo creation - ready to be sent to your counterparty? Get it done in a heartbeat with AI. (Get started for free)
"What is the significance of the Supreme Court case TRUAX et al.
v.
CORRIGAN et al.
and its impact on labor laws?"
Truax v.
Corrigan et al.
(1921) was a landmark Supreme Court case that dealt with a Minneapolis ordinance requiring employers to hire a certain percentage of employees who were city residents.
The case was brought by the Minneapolis Real Estate Exchange, represented by Truax and others, challenging the ordinance as a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Minneapolis Real Estate Exchange, holding that the ordinance was a violation of the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The Court found that the ordinance infringed on the right to contract and that it discriminated against non-residents.
The Court also held that the ordinance did not bear a substantial relation to the health, safety, or welfare of the city and its residents, and therefore, it was not a valid exercise of the police power of the city.
This decision limited the ability of local governments to impose residency requirements on employers.
This case is significant because it established the principle that local governments cannot arbitrarily discriminate against non-residents in the administration of their police power.
The Court's decision in Truax v.
Corrigan et al.
was one of several decisions during this era that limited the ability of state and local governments to regulate the economy.
This case was argued before the court on April 29 and 30, 1920 and was reargued on October 5 and 6, 1921.
The Court decided the case on December 19, 1921 by a vote of 5 to 4.
The majority opinion was delivered by Chief Justice Taft and was joined by Justices Holmes, Pitney, and Clarke.
Justices Pitney and Brandeis dissented.
This case was brought during a time when courts often struck down social and economic legislation as a violation of the due process clause.
This case is one of the examples of the Lochner era, a period in which the Supreme Court invalidated many state and federal laws that aimed to regulate the economy.
The Lochner era ended in the 1930s when the Court began to uphold social and economic legislation as a valid exercise of the police power of the state.
The case is still relevant today in the context of the debate over the role of local governments in regulating the economy and labor markets.
The case has been cited in many subsequent Supreme Court cases dealing with the constitutionality of local and state regulations.
The case has been the subject of extensive scholarly analysis and debate, with some commentators arguing that the Court's decision was based on faulty economic assumptions and disregard for the social and economic realities of the time.
The case is an example of the ongoing tension between individual rights and the power of government to regulate the economy and protect the welfare of its citizens.
This case highlights the importance of understanding the historical context and the economic, social and political factors that shape the development of constitutional law.
eDiscovery, legal research and legal memo creation - ready to be sent to your counterparty? Get it done in a heartbeat with AI. (Get started for free)