Lochner v. New York

E54705

United States Supreme Court case constitutional law case labor law case landmark decision

Lochner v. New York is a landmark 1905 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down a state labor regulation and became emblematic of the era in which the Court used substantive due process to protect economic liberty and limit government regulation of business.

Try in SPARQL Jump to: Surface forms Disambiguation Statements Elicitation Referenced by

AI illustration

All labels observed (9)

Label	Occurrences
Lochner era	18
Lochner v. New York canonical	16
Joseph Lochner v. People of the State of New York	1
Lochner era Supreme Court	1
Lochner era jurisprudence	1
Lochner era of Supreme Court jurisprudence	1
Lochner era substantive due process	1
Lochner v. New York (as contrasting precedent)	1
Lochner v. New York dissent	1

How this entity was disambiguated

This entity first appeared as the object of triple T434616 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.

NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07

Target entity: Lochner v. New York
Context triple: [Due Process Clause, interpretedInCase, Lochner v. New York]

A. NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.
NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. is a landmark 1937 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld federal power to regulate labor relations, marking a major expansion of Congress’s authority over interstate commerce.
B. Wickard v. Filburn
Wickard v. Filburn is a landmark 1942 U.S. Supreme Court case that dramatically expanded federal regulatory power by holding that even purely local, non-commercial activity could be regulated under the Commerce Clause if it had a substantial effect on interstate commerce.
C. United States v. Butler
United States v. Butler was a 1936 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down key provisions of the New Deal’s Agricultural Adjustment Act as an unconstitutional use of federal taxing and spending power.
D. United States v. Darby
United States v. Darby is a 1941 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld federal labor regulations under the Commerce Clause and marked a broad expansion of federal power over economic activity.
E. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States
Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States is a 1935 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down key provisions of the New Deal by limiting federal power under the Commerce Clause and declaring the National Industrial Recovery Act unconstitutional.
F. None of above. chosen
G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.

NED2 Entity disambiguation (via description) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07

Target entity: Lochner v. New York
Target entity description: Lochner v. New York is a landmark 1905 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down a state labor regulation and became emblematic of the era in which the Court used substantive due process to protect economic liberty and limit government regulation of business.

A. NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.
NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. is a landmark 1937 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld federal power to regulate labor relations, marking a major expansion of Congress’s authority over interstate commerce.
B. Wickard v. Filburn
Wickard v. Filburn is a landmark 1942 U.S. Supreme Court case that dramatically expanded federal regulatory power by holding that even purely local, non-commercial activity could be regulated under the Commerce Clause if it had a substantial effect on interstate commerce.
C. United States v. Butler
United States v. Butler was a 1936 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down key provisions of the New Deal’s Agricultural Adjustment Act as an unconstitutional use of federal taxing and spending power.
D. United States v. Darby
United States v. Darby is a 1941 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld federal labor regulations under the Commerce Clause and marked a broad expansion of federal power over economic activity.
E. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States
Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States is a 1935 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down key provisions of the New Deal by limiting federal power under the Commerce Clause and declaring the National Industrial Recovery Act unconstitutional.
F. None of above. chosen

Statements (52)

Predicate	Object
instanceOf	United States Supreme Court case ⓘ constitutional law case ⓘ labor law case ⓘ landmark decision ⓘ
areaOfLaw	economic regulation ⓘ labor regulation ⓘ
argued	1904-02-23 ⓘ 1904-02-24 ⓘ
citation	198 U.S. 45 ⓘ
constitutionalProvisionInterpreted	Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause ⓘ linked to: Due Process Clause
criticizedFor	invalidating social and economic legislation ⓘ judicial activism ⓘ
decidingCourt	Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
decisionDate	1905-04-17 ⓘ
decisionType	5–4 decision ⓘ
dissentBy	Edward Douglass White ⓘ John Marshall Harlan ⓘ Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. ⓘ William R. Day ⓘ
eraNamedAfterCase	Lochner era ⓘ linked to: Lochner v. New York
fullCaseName	Joseph Lochner v. People of the State of New York ⓘ linked to: Lochner v. New York
hasJurisdiction	United States ⓘ linked to: United States of America
holding	New York law limiting bakers to 60 hours of work per week and 10 hours per day violates the Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ freedom of contract is protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ
impact	constrained state police power over economic regulation during the Lochner era ⓘ
influenced	jurisprudence on economic liberty ⓘ
issue	constitutionality of maximum-hours legislation for bakers ⓘ
joinedByInMajority	David J. Brewer ⓘ Henry Billings Brown ⓘ John Marshall Harlan (not in majority; remove) ⓘ linked to: John Marshall Harlan Joseph McKenna ⓘ Melville W. Fuller ⓘ
legalDoctrine	freedom of contract ⓘ substantive due process ⓘ
locationOfLowerCourt	New York ⓘ
majorityOpinionBy	Rufus W. Peckham ⓘ
namedAfter	Joseph Lochner ⓘ
overturnedStatute	New York Bakeshop Act ⓘ
pageInUnitedStatesReports	45 ⓘ
party	Joseph Lochner ⓘ People of the State of New York ⓘ linked to: Government of the State of New York
relatedCase	Adkins v. Children’s Hospital ⓘ Muller v. Oregon ⓘ linked to: Muller v. Oregon brief Nebbia v. New York ⓘ West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish ⓘ
subjectOf	extensive scholarly commentary ⓘ
subsequentHistory	limited and repudiated by later Supreme Court decisions ⓘ
symbolizes	judicial protection of economic liberty against regulation ⓘ limits on government regulation of business ⓘ
topic	bakers’ working hours ⓘ
volumeOfUnitedStatesReports	198 ⓘ
yearDecided	1905 ⓘ

How these facts were elicited