|
gptkbp:instance_of
|
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
|
|
gptkbp:case_outcome
|
Affirmed lower court ruling
Constitutional validity confirmed
Influenced future interpretations of the Commerce Clause
Clarified role of courts in economic regulation
Deference to legislative judgment affirmed
Economic regulation justified
Framework for future cases established
Legislative intent recognized
No violation of due process found
No violation of equal protection found
Public welfare justification accepted
Regulatory authority upheld
Standard of review established
|
|
gptkbp:decided_by
|
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
|
|
gptkbp:dissenting_opinion
|
gptkb:Justice_Murphy
gptkb:Justice_Jackson
|
|
gptkbp:historical_context
|
gptkb:Great_Depression
Rise of regulatory state
|
|
https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label
|
United States v. Carolene Products Co.
|
|
gptkbp:impact
|
gptkb:Constitution
Administrative law
Legislative powers
Judicial review standards
|
|
gptkbp:influenced_by
|
gptkb:Lochner_v._New_York
gptkb:Munn_v._Illinois
|
|
gptkbp:involved_parties
|
gptkb:United_States
gptkb:Carolene_Products_Company
|
|
gptkbp:is_cited_in
|
304 U. S. 144
Cited in later economic regulation cases
|
|
gptkbp:judges
|
gptkb:Justice_William_O._Douglas
gptkb:Justice_Felix_Frankfurter
gptkb:Justice_Hugo_Black
gptkb:Justice_Louis_Brandeis
gptkb:Justice_Harlan_Fiske_Stone
|
|
gptkbp:legal_context
|
gptkb:New_Deal_legislation
|
|
gptkbp:legal_principle
|
Rational basis review
Economic regulation standard
|
|
gptkbp:major_issues
|
Regulation of food products
|
|
gptkbp:outcome
|
Regulation upheld
|
|
gptkbp:precedent
|
Subsequent cases involving economic regulation
|
|
gptkbp:related_cases
|
gptkb:West_Coast_Hotel_Co._v._Parrish
gptkb:United_States_v._Butler
gptkb:Nebbia_v._New_York
|
|
gptkbp:significance
|
Established the 'rational basis' test
|
|
gptkbp:year
|
1938
|
|
gptkbp:bfsParent
|
gptkb:Taft_Court
gptkb:Harlan_F._Stone
gptkb:Harlan_Fiske_Stone
|
|
gptkbp:bfsLayer
|
4
|