Today in Supreme Court History: December 19, 1940

12/19/1940: U.S. v. Darby argued.

 

Comments

[JoeFromtheBronx]

This has no apparent connection to Darby O'Gill and the Little People about leprechauns.

It involves a minimum wage and maximum hours law. It unanimously upheld the federal law. The opinion (in)famously notes:

Our conclusion is unaffected by the Tenth Amendment. which provides:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The amendment states but a truism that all is retained which has not been surrendered. There is nothing in the history of its adoption to suggest that it was more than declaratory of the relationship between the national and state governments as it had been established by the Constitution before the amendment, or that its purpose was other than to allay fears that the new national government might seek to exercise powers not granted, and that the states might not be able to exercise fully their reserved powers.

It does not mean the 10A is of no value. The First Congress provided a statement when sending the BOR to the states:

The Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/bill-of-rights-transcript

Many Federalists argued that a bill of rights was not necessary. For instance, the Congress did not have the power to establish religion. Why the need to say so again?

But, many people were still concerned, wanting a clear statement that would provide something to rally around. The Tenth Amendment has such value, including people declaring it having a meaning that is not expressly demanded by the mere text.

Many state bill of rights had similar "declaratory" statements, some open-ended statements of principle that on their own were largely symbolic and hortatory.

Anyway, if Congress has power over interstate commerce, it is a power delegated, and the Tenth Amendment is not abridged.