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