Post on 02-Apr-2018
7/27/2019 alal schecter poultry corp vs us.doc
1/2
L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States, 295 U.S. 495, 55 S. Ct. 837, 79 L. Ed. 1570
(1935), is one of the most famous cases from the Great Depression era. The case tested the legality of
certain methods used by Congress and President franklin d. roosevelt to combat the devastating
economic effects of the depression. After the U.S. Supreme Court declared the methodsunconstitutional, Roosevelt publicly scolded the Court and later used the decision as one justification
for a controversial plan to stock the Court with justices more receptive of Roosevelt's programs.
At the heart of the Schechter case was legislation passed by Congress in 1933. The
national industrial recovery act (NIRA) (48 Stat. 195) was passed in response to the
unemployment and poverty that swept the nation in the early 1930s and provided for the
establishment of local codes for fair competition in industry. The codes were written by private
trade and industrial groups. If the president approved the codes, they became law. Businesses
were required to display a Blue Eagle insignia from the National Recovery Administration to
signify their compliance with the codes. Typical local codes set minimum wages and maximum
hours for workers and gave workers the right to organize into unions and engage in Collective
Bargaining with management. Codes also prescribed fair trade practices, and many codes set
minimum prices for the sale of goods.
The Schechter Poultry Corporation, owned and operated by Joseph, Martin, Alex, and Aaron
Schechter, was in the business of selling chickens at wholesale. The corporation purchased some of thepoultry from outside the state of New York. It bought the poultry at markets and railroad terminals in
New York City and sold the poultry to retailers in the city and surrounding environs. In April 1934President Roosevelt approved the code of fair competition for the live poultry industry of the
New York City metropolitan area (Live Poultry Code). In July 1934 the Schechters were arrested
and indicted on 60 counts of violating the Live Poultry Code. The indictment included charges that
Schechter Poultry had failed to observe the Minimum Wage and maximum hour provisions applicable
to workers and that it had violated a provision of the Live Poultry Code prohibiting the sale of unfitchickens. The case became popularly known as the Sick Chicken case.
The Schechters pleaded not guilty to the charges. At trial, the Schechters were convicted
on 18 counts of violating the Live Poultry Code and two counts of conspiring to violate the Live
Poultry Code. An appeals court affirmed their convictions, but the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to
hear their appeal.
The Schechters presented several arguments challenging the Live Poultry Code.
According to the Schechters, the code system of the NIRA was an unconstitutional Abdication ofthe legislative power vested in Congress by Article I, Section 1, of the U.S. Constitution. The
Schechters argued further that their intrastate wholesale business was not subject to congressional
authority under the Commerce Clause of Article I, Section 8, Clause 3, of the Constitution and that the
procedures for enforcing the NIRA codes violated the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment.
In support of the Live Poultry Code, the federal government argued that the code was necessary
for the good of the nation. According to the government, the Live Poultry Code ensured the free flow ofchickens in interstate commerce. This arrangement kept chicken prices low and helped ease,
however slightly, the financial burden on the general public. The government also argued that it
was within the power of Congress to enact the NIRA regulatory scheme that gave rise to the Live
Poultry Code because codes such as the Live Poultry Code applied only to businesses engaged in
interstate commerce.
7/27/2019 alal schecter poultry corp vs us.doc
2/2