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.
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 of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| dissentBy | James C. McReynolds NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| famousFor | Footnote Four NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| followedByCase | United States v. Darby NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| 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 NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasCitation | 304 U.S. 144 ⓘ |
| hasCourt | Supreme Court of the United States NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| 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. NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| 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
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Charles Evans Hughes NERFINISHED ⓘ Hugo L. Black NERFINISHED ⓘ Louis Brandeis NERFINISHED ⓘ Owen J. Roberts NERFINISHED ⓘ Stanley F. Reed NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| 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 NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| pageInUnitedStatesReports | 144 ⓘ |
| petitioner | United States NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| precededByCase | Nebbia v. New York NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| respondent | Carolene Products Company NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| statuteInterpreted | Filled Milk Act of 1923 NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| subjectMatter | regulation of food products in interstate commerce ⓘ |
| volumeOfUnitedStatesReports | 304 ⓘ |
| wasArguedOn |
1938-02-10
ⓘ
1938-02-11 ⓘ |
| wasDecidedOn | 1938-04-25 ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1938 ⓘ |
Referenced by (4)
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.
ⓘ
subject surface form:
Harlan Fiske Stone