Anticanon

*''[[Lochner v. New York]]'' (1905): held that a [[New York (state)|New York]] statute prescribing maximum working hours for bakers violated the bakers' right to [[freedom of contract]] under the [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourteenth Amendment.]]''Lochner v. New York'', [[List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 198|198]] [[United States Reports|U.S.]] [https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/198/45/ 45] (1905). ''This article incorporates [[Copyright status of works by the federal government of the United States|public domain material from this U.S government document]].'' ''Lochner'' is part of the [[Lochner era|''Lochner'' era]] in constitutional law, wherein the [[Supreme Court of the United States|Supreme Court]] struck down many state economic regulations under the doctrine of [[substantive due process]].{{cite book | last=Jacobs | first=Harvey Martin | title=Private property in the 21st century : the future of an American ideal | publisher=Edward Elgar | publication-place=Cheltenham, UK | date=2004 | isbn=1-84376-327-3 | oclc=52547683 }}{{rp|page=36}} The ''Lochner'' era ended in the late 1930s, usually attributed to progressive reformer [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]]'s court-packing threat, with "[[the switch in time that saved nine]]" in ''[[West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish]]'' (1937) (upholding a minimum wage law enacted by [[Washington (state)|Washington state]]).{{rp|page=47}}

*''[[Lochner v. New York]]'' (1905): held that a [[New York (state)|New York]] statute prescribing maximum working hours for bakers violated the bakers' right to [[freedom of contract]] under the [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourteenth Amendment.]]''Lochner v. New York'', [[List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 198|198]] [[United States Reports|U.S.]] [https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/198/45/ 45] (1905). ''This article incorporates [[Copyright status of works by the federal government of the United States|public domain material from this U.S government document]].'' ''Lochner'' is part of the [[Lochner era|''Lochner'' era]] in constitutional law, wherein the [[Supreme Court of the United States|Supreme Court]] struck down many state economic regulations under the doctrine of [[substantive due process]].{{cite book | last=Jacobs | first=Harvey Martin | title=Private property in the 21st century : the future of an American ideal | publisher=Edward Elgar | publication-place=Cheltenham, UK | date=2004 | isbn=1-84376-327-3 | oclc=52547683 }}{{rp|page=36}} The ''Lochner'' era ended in the late 1930s, usually attributed to progressive reformer [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]]'s court-packing threat, with "[[the switch in time that saved nine]]" in ''[[West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish]]'' (1937) (upholding a minimum wage law enacted by [[Washington (state)|Washington state]]).{{rp|page=47}}

*''[[Korematsu v. United States]]'' (1944): upheld the exclusion of [[Japanese Americans]] from the West Coast Military Area during World War II, permitting the removal of West Coast Japanese Americans to [[Internment of Japanese Americans|exclusion camps]]. Decided on the same day as ''[[Ex parte Endo]]'', which held that loyal citizens could not be detained without a hearing. ''Ex parte Endo'' effectively ended Japanese American exclusion and internment. Overturned by ''[[Trump v. Hawaii]]''.{{cite court |litigants=Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard |vol=600 |reporter=U.S. |opinion=___ |pinpoint=16 |court=S. Ct. |date=June 29, 2023 |url=https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/20-1199_l6gn.pdf |quote= |postscript= }}

*''[[Korematsu v. United States]]'' (1944): upheld the exclusion of [[Japanese Americans]] from the West Coast Military Area during World War II, permitting the removal of West Coast Japanese Americans to [[Internment of Japanese Americans|exclusion camps]]. Decided on the same day as ''[[Ex parte Endo]]'', which held that loyal citizens could not be detained without a hearing. ''Ex parte Endo'' effectively ended Japanese American exclusion and internment. Overturned by ''[[Trump v. Hawaii]]''.{{cite court |litigants=Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard |vol=600 |reporter=U.S. |opinion=___ |pinpoint=16 |court=S. Ct. |date=June 29, 2023 |url=https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/20-1199_l6gn.pdf |quote= |postscript= }}

===Other notable examples===

===Other notable examples===

* {{ussc|name=Hammer v. Dagenhart|247|251|1918}}{{cn|date=April 2026}}, overruled by {{ussc|name=United States v. Darby|312|100|1941}}

* {{ussc|name=Hammer v. Dagenhart|247|251|1918}}{{cn|date=April 2026}}, overruled by {{ussc|name=United States v. Darby|312|100|1941}}

* {{ussc|name=Kelo v. City of New London|545|469|2005}}{{cn|date=April 2026}}{{efn|Never overruled, but commonly repudiated via State-level constitutional amendments, as many regard it as one of the worst decisions of all time.}}

* {{ussc|name=Kelo v. City of New London|545|469|2005}}{{cn|date=April 2026}}{{efn|Never overruled, but commonly repudiated via State-level constitutional amendments, as many regard it as one of the worst decisions of all time.}}

== Notes ==

{{notelist}}

==References==

==References==