{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Bailey v Drexel Furniture Co

Bailey v Drexel Furniture Co - Constitution as it intruded...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Bailey v. Drexel Furniture Co 1919 I. Facts a. As an exercise of its taxing powers Congress enacted the Revenue Act of 1919, also called the Child Labor Tax Law. Under the law, companies employing children under fourteen years of age would be assessed ten percent of their annual profits. During the same year in which the act was passed, Drexel Furniture Company was found in violation of it and required to pay over $6000 in taxes, which it did under protest. b. II. Legal Questions presented a. Did Congress violate the Constitution in adopting the Child Labor Tax Law in attempting to regulate the employment of children, a power reserved to the states under the Tenth Amendment? b. III. Answers a. Yes. The Court found that the Child Labor Tax Law was in violation of the
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Constitution as it intruded on the jurisdiction of states to adopt and enforce child labor codes. Chief Justice Taft argued that the tax law in question did much more than simply impose an "incidental restraint" but exerted a "prohibitory and regulatory effect" in a realm over which Congress had no jurisdiction. Taft feared that upholding this law would destroy state sovereignty and devastate "all constitutional limitation of the powers of Congress" by allowing it to disguise future regulatory legislation in the cloak of taxes. IV. Reasons (by ___) a. Form of argument b. Legal doctrines V. Dissent reasons VI. Concurring reasons Notes...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online