United States v. Carolene Products Co.

E723377

United States v. Carolene Products Co. is a 1938 U.S. Supreme Court case best known for its Footnote Four, which laid the groundwork for modern constitutional scrutiny of legislation affecting fundamental rights and discrete and insular minorities.

All labels observed (2)

How this entity was disambiguated

Statements (47)

Predicate Object
instanceOf Due Process Clause case ⓘ
United States Supreme Court case ⓘ
constitutional law case ⓘ
areaOfLaw United States constitutional law ⓘ
federal regulatory power ⓘ
country United States ⓘ
dissentBy James C. McReynolds ⓘ
famousFor Footnote Four ⓘ
followedByCase United States v. Darby ⓘ
footnoteFourSuggests more searching judicial inquiry for legislation directed at discrete and insular minorities ⓘ
more searching judicial inquiry for legislation restricting political processes ⓘ
more searching judicial inquiry for legislation restricting specific constitutional prohibitions ⓘ
footnoteNumber 4 ⓘ
fullCaseName United States v. Carolene Products Company ⓘ
hasCitation 304 U.S. 144 ⓘ
hasCourt Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
hasDocketNumber No. 640 ⓘ
holding Economic regulations affecting ordinary commercial transactions are presumed constitutional if supported by a rational basis. ⓘ
The Filled Milk Act is a constitutional exercise of Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce. ⓘ
impact laid groundwork for modern constitutional scrutiny of legislation affecting discrete and insular minorities ⓘ
laid groundwork for modern constitutional scrutiny of legislation affecting fundamental rights ⓘ
influencedDoctrine heightened scrutiny for laws targeting discrete and insular minorities ⓘ
strict scrutiny for laws affecting fundamental rights ⓘ
tiers of scrutiny in constitutional law ⓘ
introducedConcept rational basis review for economic legislation ⓘ
joinedByInMajority Benjamin N. Cardozo ⓘ
Charles Evans Hughes ⓘ
Hugo L. Black ⓘ
Louis Brandeis ⓘ
Owen J. Roberts ⓘ
Stanley F. Reed ⓘ
linked to: Stanley Reed
jurisdiction federal question jurisdiction ⓘ
legalIssue constitutionality of federal regulation of filled milk ⓘ
scope of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause ⓘ
standard of review for economic regulation ⓘ
majorityOpinionBy Harlan F. Stone ⓘ
pageInUnitedStatesReports 144 ⓘ
petitioner United States ⓘ
precededByCase Nebbia v. New York ⓘ
respondent Carolene Products Company ⓘ
statuteInterpreted Filled Milk Act of 1923 ⓘ
subjectMatter regulation of food products in interstate commerce ⓘ
volumeOfUnitedStatesReports 304 ⓘ
wasArguedOn 1938-02-10 ⓘ
1938-02-11 ⓘ
wasDecidedOn 1938-04-25 ⓘ
yearDecided 1938 ⓘ

How these facts were elicited

Referenced by (5)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Footnote Four in United States v. Carolene Products Co. → partOf → United States v. Carolene Products Co. ⓘ
Footnote Four in United States v. Carolene Products Co. → associatedWithCase → United States v. Carolene Products Co. ⓘ
Harlan Fiske Stone → notableCase → United States v. Carolene Products Co. ⓘ
subject linked to: Justice Stone
Railway Express Agency v. New York → relatedCase → United States v. Carolene Products Co. ⓘ
United States v. Carolene Products Co. → fullCaseName → United States v. Carolene Products Company ⓘ
linked to: United States v. Carolene Products Co.