Other Free Encyclopedias » Law Library - American Law and Legal Information » Notable Trials and Court Cases - 1918 to 1940

Mulford v. Smith - Significance, Justice Roberts Reverses Himself, Swing Vote

court press deal appellant

Appellant

James H. Mulford

Appellee

Nat Smith

Appellant's Claim

That penalties under the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 for overproduction are unconstitutional.

Chief Lawyers for Appellant

A. J. Little, L. E. Heath

Chief Lawyer for Appellee

Omer W. Franklin

Justices for the Court

Hugo Lafayette Black, Felix Frankfurter, Charles Evans Hughes, Stanley Forman Reed, Owen Josephus Roberts (writing for the Court), Harlan Fiske Stone

Justices Dissenting

Pierce Butler, James Clark McReynolds (Louis D. Brandeis did not participate)

Place

Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

17 April 1939

Decision

The Supreme Court upheld the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938.

Related Cases

  • United States v. Butler, 297 U.S. 1 (1936).
  • West Coast Hotel v. Parrish, 300 U.S. 379 (1937).

Sources

Lance Liebman "Swing Man on the Supreme Court." The New York Times, 8 October 1972.

Further Readings

  • Badger, Anthony J. Prosperity Road: The New Deal, Tobacco, and North Carolina. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1980.
  • Maidment, R. A. The Judicial Response to the New Deal: The U.S. Supreme Court and Economic Regulation, 1934-1936. New York, NY: Manchester University Press, 1991.
  • Saloutos, Theodore. The American Farmer and the New Deal. Ames: University of Iowa Press, 1982.

Additional Topics

Mulford v. Smith - Significance

Justice Roberts, who had written the opinion striking down the first Agricultural Adjustment Act, United States v. Butler (1936), also wrote the opinion here. His change in attitude is a vivid illustration of the important role he played as a swing vote on the Court. James H. Mulford was a tobacco producer who had been fined under the terms of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, a piece of le…

Mulford v. Smith - Justice Roberts Reverses Himself

Owen J. Roberts had often been a swing vote on the Court during the early years of the New Deal. From 1933 to 1937, the Court was dominated by justices who were holdovers from earlier, highly conservative Courts that believed, above all things, in the laissez faire approach to economic matters. That is, they believed that the federal government should not interfere in the marketplace. With the ons…

Mulford v. Smith - Swing Vote

Myers v. United States - Significance, History Of Appointment And Removal Powers, A Former President Defends Presidential Powers, Three Strong Dissents [next] [back] Morehead v. New York - Significance, A Dissenting Opinion, Resolution And Reversal, Impact

User Comments

Your email address will be altered so spam harvesting bots can't read it easily.
Hide my email completely instead?

Cancel or