Nebbia v. New York (1900)
- Docket
- 531
- Decided
- 1900-1940-
Summary
Question: Did the regulation violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment? Conclusion: Following a lengthy discussion of the Due Process Clause, the Court held that since the price controls were not "arbitrary, discriminatory, or demonstrably irrelevant" to the policy adopted by the legislature to promote the general welfare, the regulation was constitutional. In an opinion authored by Justice Owen Roberts, the Court reasoned that regulations are not an inappropriate way to serve the public interest. When industry is particularly tied into a public interest, it is more subject to the state police powers. Courts may not override policy decisions by states in this area on the grounds of due process unless rational basis review is not satisfied. Rational basis review, which is used for economic regulations, requires that the law is not unreasonable or arbitrary and also that there is a reasonable relationship between the law and the interest that it serves. Price regulations are not per se beyond the framework of due process. Justice McReynolds wrote a dissenting opinion, which was joined by Justices Van Devanter, Sutherland, and Butler.