1 minute read

Hammer v. Dagenhart - Significance, The Keating-owen Act, The Act Is Challenged, To Regulate Or To Destroy?

Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1918 to 1940

Appellant

W. C. Hammer, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of North Carolina

Appellee

Roland Dagenhart

Appellant's Claim

That Roland Dagenhart, by allowing his two teenaged sons to work in a North Carolina cotton mill, was in violation of the Keating-Owen Act, which limited child labor.

Chief Lawyers for Appellant

John William Davis, U.S. Solicitor General; Roscoe Pound, Dean of Harvard Law School

Chief Lawyer for Appellee

Junius Parker

Justices for the Court

William Rufus Day (writing for the Court), Joseph McKenna, Mahlon Pitney, Willis Van Devanter, Edward Douglass White

Justices Dissenting

Louis D. Brandeis, John Hessin Clarke, Oliver Wendell Holmes, James Clark McReynolds

Place

Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

3 June 1918

Decision

That Congress did not have the right to exclude from interstate commerce all goods manufactured by child labor, as the Keating-Owen Act had tried to do.

Related Cases

  • Champion v. Ames, 188 U.S. 321 (1903).
  • Hipolite Egg Co. v. United States, 220 U.S. 45 (1911).
  • Hoke v. United States, 227 U.S. 308 (1913).
  • United States v. Darby, 312 U.S. 100 (1941).

Sources

West's Encyclopedia of American Law Minneapolis, Minnesota: West Publishing, 1998.

Sources

West's Encyclopedia of American Law Minneapolis, Minnesota: West Publishing, 1998.

Additional topics