Economic Substantive Due Process (Essay Sample)

Economic Substantive Due Process
Name
Tutor
Course
Date
Economic Substantive Due Process
The substantive due process prohibits the United States government from encroaching on the fundamental constitutional liberties. The procedural due process in contrast prohibits the government from arbitrary depriving an individual of legally protected interests without giving them a notice as well as the opportunity to be heard.
The due process section provides that no person shall be deprived of property, life, liberty without following the due process of the law. When the court faces questions regarding the substantive due processes, the controlling issues should be centred about liberty. The courts must be able to determine the scope and nature of the right protected by the United States constitution before affording litigants a specific freedom.
The Munn v. Illinois case was decided in the year 1976 by the Supreme Court. Munn, a warehouse partner, was found guilty of violating the state laws providing the fixation of maximum charges for the storage of grain. It was seen as taking property without involving the law process. The Supreme Court upheld the Granger laws, ascertaining the principle of publishing regulation of private business that included serving the interests of the public.[Epstein, Lee and Thomas Walker. Constitutional Law for a Changing America: Institutional Powers and Constraints. 8th edition (Washington: Congressional Quarterly Press. 2013), 616]
The Slaughterhouse case, on the other hand, the Supreme Court interpreted the relative new fourteenth amendment of the U.S constitution. It was an essential case in the civil rights law to protecting the privileges and immunities bestowed by virtue of the federal U.S citizenship to the entire individual within the state. It excluded the privileges or the immunities who are the citizens of the state. The state, therefore, was able to endow business monopolies to some of its citizens discriminating others.
The law was passed by the Louisiana legislature that granted a monopoly to Crescent city livestock Landing and Slaughterhouse company to slaughter animals in the environs of New Orleans. It was speculated that the move was designed to facilitate a political benefaction. In any case, the law banned any other slaughterhouse from operating in New Orleans. They, therefore, argued that the law violated their privileges to function therefore, preventing them from earning a living. The matter was taken to the Supreme Court, but the court argued that the law only prohibits the states from withholding such privileges and immunities that belong to the American citizenship, but not to the States citizenship. These cases have proved to be more important as a historical snapshot as opposed to a lasting court decision.[Epstein, Lee and Thomas Walker. Constitutional Law for a Changing America: Institutional Powers and Constraints. 8th edition (Washington: Congressional Quarterly Press. 2013), 610]
In the Lochner v. New York case was a landmark case for the United States Supreme Court, which held the liberty of contract. It was contained in the due process clause fourteenth amendment. This case involved a law from New York that limited the number of hours a baker could work every day to ten hours, followed by each week to sixty hours. With a vote of five to four, the argument was rejected by the Supreme Court saying it was necessary to protect the bakers’ health. The court decided it was a labor law attempting to control the terms of employment calling it unreasonable and arbitrary interference with the rights and the liberty of individuals to the contract.[Epstein, Lee and Thomas Walker. Constitutional Law for a Changing ...