Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Following the Civil War, the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause prompted substantive due process interpretations to be urged on the Supreme Court as a limitation on state legislation. Initially, however, the Supreme Court rejected substantive due process as it came to be understood, including in the seminal Slaughter-House Cases. [18]
This category is for court cases in the United States dealing with the substantive due process rights found in the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Subcategories This category has the following 2 subcategories, out of 2 total.
substantive due process, economic liberties Brady v. Maryland: Criminal procedure: 373 U.S. 83 (1963) exculpatory evidence and due process Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. Paul: 373 U.S. 132 (1963) Preemption, Dormant Commerce Clause: Silver v. New York Stock Exchange: 373 U.S. 341 (1963)
Nan D. Hunter has argued that Lawrence used a new method of substantive due process analysis, and that the Court intended to abandon its old method of categorizing due process rights as either "fundamental" or "not fundamental" as too restrictive. [95] Justice Souter, for example, argued in Washington v.
Rather, he grounds his analysis in the liberty interest of the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause. [10] Reasoning that lacking money is not an acceptable reason to restrict a person's liberty, he concludes that the traditions of the United States forbid such a restriction, and that the proper justification for holding the law to be ...
Critics of a substantive due process often claim that the doctrine began, at the federal level, with the infamous 1857 slavery case of Dred Scott v. Sandford. However, other critics contend that substantive due process was not used by the federal judiciary until after the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted in 1869. [51]
[17] Finally, he said that the Court was using "cruel and unusual punishment" as a disguise of "substantive due process": If this case involved economic regulation, the present Court's allergy to substantive due process would surely save the statute and prevent the Court from imposing its own philosophical predilections upon state legislatures ...
The Supreme Court's due process jurisprudence over the next three decades was inconsistent, but it took a narrow view of states' police powers in several major labor cases after Lochner. For example, in Coppage v. Kansas (1915), the Court struck down statutes forbidding "yellow-dog contracts." Similarly, in Adkins v.