Unemployment in the United States

Bibliographic data

Monograph

Identifikator:: 1828236179

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-226169

Document type:: Monograph

Title:: Unemployment in the United States

Place of publication:: Washington

Publisher:: United States, Government Printing Office

Year of publication:: 1930

Scope:: II, 193 Seiten

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

a. 3 y > sl ¥ | ™ 3 a g : 0 fig RL {; 2» i353 if o z NN @ NY 1 A 5 in + 1 > tn + ND ™) ih 00 | - oo oO 0 OO (a) oO NY) -— 3 0 0 + 0 if > 5 O 0 + > 7 © n al N > oo UNEMPLOYMENT IN THE UNITED STATES 155 dd do. And, of course, I direct my statements to Senate bill Or two of the witnesses that have appeared before the com- quoted from the decision of the Supreme Court in Massachu- 5 Mellon, in support of their statement that the Supreme Court -id the maternity act unconstitutional. I merely wish to clear question that they have raised about that. The court specifi- eclined to pass upon or discuss the constitutionality of that ‘he court said, further: ‘Ve No power per se to review and annul acts of Congress on the ground ¥ are unconstitutional. That question may be considered only when ification for some direct injury suffered or threatened, presenting a Te issue, is made to rest upon such an act. portions of that opinion that have been presented to your ‘tee in support of the aot as constitutional were those parts of nion wherein the court set, out to explain that the plaintiffs in vo suits had not suffered the sort of direct injury that the court 1st be brought before them before a justiciable issue could be ed. rence has been made, ag usual, to the general-welfare clause Constitution and, in response to the suggestions that the d general-welfare clause of the Constitution grants to Con- thority to legislate upon mafters not directly committed to control under the Constitution, and that there are fields those embraced within the limited powers delegated to the Government in which it is appropriate the Congress should for what it considers the general welfare of the country, I call the committee's attention to the following pronounce- I the Supreme Court of the United States, covering the period te early days of the Republic and coming down to the present d, if the committee please, I have excerpts from these opinions would. like to submit. I would like to state the titles of the nd the dates of the decisions and. ask leave to include in the brief quotations from each of these decisions. CHAIRMAN, Without reading them? PEckHAM. Without reading them. . Cuarrman, Well, that is your privilege; you can exercise ’ECKHAM. And in that connection T cite the case of New York (1 Det. 102, 139), decided in 1837; In re Raher (140 U. S. «cided in 1890; Kansas ». Colorado (206 U. S. 46), decided in Pucker. That is Judge Brewer's opinion? mera Dogan U. S. 251), decided in 1918 | mer v. Dagenhart (247 . S. , decic r 1 id like to direct mn to the fact that in the Dagupon, + dissentin: opinion was not based upon any recognition o J e by of the a to legislate in matters of local concern for eral welfare but, on the contrary, was predicated upon the the minority of the court that the power to regulate commerce the States included the power to prohibit the transportation state commerce of articles that Congress: deemed should be Q 0 J Te)

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Unemployment in the United States

Monograph

Table of contents

Download

Monograph

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation