Slaughterhouse Cases

(redirected from Slaughter-House Cases)
Also found in: Legal, Wikipedia.

Slaughterhouse Cases,

cases decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1873. In 1869 the Louisiana legislature granted a 25-year monopoly to a slaughterhouse concern in New Orleans for the stated purpose of protecting the people's health. Other slaughterhouse operators barred from their trade brought suit, principally on the ground that they had been deprived of their property without due process of law in violation of the Fourteenth AmendmentFourteenth Amendment,
addition to the U.S. Constitution, adopted 1868. The amendment comprises five sections. Section 1

Section 1 of the amendment declares that all persons born or naturalized in the United States are American citizens and citizens of their state
..... Click the link for more information.
. The U.S. Supreme Court, with Justice Samuel F. Miller rendering the majority decision, decided against the slaughterhouse operators, holding that the Fourteenth Amendment had to be considered in light of the original purpose of its framers, i.e., to guarantee the freedom of former black slaves. Although the amendment could not be construed to refer only to black slavery, its scope as originally planned did not include rights such as those in question. A distinction was drawn between United States and state citizenship, and it was held that the amendment did not intend to deprive the state of legal jurisdiction over the civil rights of its citizens. The restraint placed by the Louisiana legislators on the slaughterhouse operators was declared not to deprive them of their property without due process.
The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia™ Copyright © 2013, Columbia University Press. Licensed from Columbia University Press. All rights reserved.
References in periodicals archive ?
The process began with the Slaughter-House Cases, (17) in which a
In fact, one of the dissenting justices in the Slaughter-House Cases (34) aptly referred to it as a "new Magna Carta"; it was an understanding that the states, despite the assumption that they would be the more reliable guardians of liberty, in many instances were not.
Shortly after the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, of course, the United States Supreme Court pulled a hat-trick, and decided in the Slaughter-House Cases (1) and the Civil Rights Cases that the Fourteenth Amendment didn't change anything with regard to fundamental rights in the Bill of Rights applying to the states.
Slaughter-House Cases and resulting rise of rational-basis review and
The first cases interpreting the Civil War Amendments were the Slaughter-House Cases decided in 1873.
How might the Court's two most prominent decisions interpreting Reconstruction enactments, the Slaughter-House Cases (131) (1873) and the Civil Rights Cases (132) (1883), be understood once attention has been drawn to the distinction between "secured" and "created" civil rights, to the race-based character of the "created" rights category, and to the overlapping treatment of intentional and negligent state infringements on rights?
To make a further point about the misconceived quest for the original public meaning, I shall analyze the interpretation of the Privileges or Immunities Clause in the Slaughter-House Cases. (38) Many constitutional scholars and judges--including liberals and conservatives alike, originalists along with moral readers--believe that Slaughter-House was wrongly decided.
The Federal Government was pushed out of the; equation with careful parsing of the Constitution the 14th Amendment in cases before the Supreme Court, particularly the Slaughter-House Cases and a case called US v.
With the so-called Slaughter-House Cases of 1873, the US Supreme Court effectively nullified the "privileges and immunities" clause of the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution, and thereby, according to Bolick (of the Hoover Institution), opening the door to excessive government regulation of business and loss of economic liberty without legal recourse for those harmed.
There has even emerged a sort of consensus that the Supreme Court, in the Slaughter-House Cases of 1873, when it interpreted the Fourteenth Amendment for the first time, got the Privileges or Immunities Clause wrong.
Thus, the majority decision in the Slaughter-House Cases eviscerated the Privileges or Immunities Clause, causing the litigants in future cases to shift the locus of their arguments to the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses.
But, just a few years after the adoption of the 14th Amendment, the question of its meaning and applicability came to the fore in the Slaughter-House Cases before the Supreme Court in 1873.