United States v. Carolene Products Co.
1938 U.S. Supreme Court case on regulating interstate commerce / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about United States v. Carolene Products Co.?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
United States v. Carolene Products Company, 304 U.S. 144 (1938), was a case of the United States Supreme Court that upheld the federal government's power to prohibit filled milk from being shipped in interstate commerce. In his majority opinion for the Court, Associate Justice Harlan F. Stone wrote that economic regulations were "presumptively constitutional" under a deferential standard of review known as the "rational basis test".
United States v. Carolene Products Co. | |
---|---|
Argued April 6, 1938 Decided April 25, 1938 | |
Full case name | United States v. Carolene Products Company |
Citations | 304 U.S. 144 (more) 58 S. Ct. 778; 82 L. Ed. 1234; 1938 U.S. LEXIS 1022 |
Case history | |
Prior | Demurrer to indictment sustained, 7 F. Supp. 500 (S.D. Ill. 1934) |
Holding | |
The Filled Milk Act did not exceed the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce, or violate due process under the Fifth Amendment. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Stone, joined by Hughes, Brandeis, Roberts; Black (except the part designated "Third") |
Concurrence | Butler |
Dissent | McReynolds |
Reed and Cardozo took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
Laws applied | |
U.S. Const. art. I; U.S. Const. amend. V; 21 U.S.C. § 61-63 (1938) (Filled Milk Act § 61-63) |
The case is most notable for Footnote Four, in which Stone wrote that the Court would exercise a stricter standard of review when a law appears on its face to violate a provision of the United States Constitution, restricts the political process in a way that could impede the repeal of an undesirable law, or discriminates against "discrete and insular" minorities. Footnote Four would influence later Supreme Court decisions, and the higher standard of review is now known as "strict scrutiny".