During the New Deal era of the United States, there were specific issues and various cases in which the U.D. Supreme Court differ with Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s administration policies. One has to look at “The Great Depression” that started in 1929 which decimated the country’s economy (Hoffer 2016). For example, GDP in the country feel by 50% between 1929 and 1931 (Hoffer 2016)! The New Deal was the start of modern American liberalism (Hoffer 2016). President Roosevelt’s ambitious plan to revitalize the economy was not without controversy or opposition. Documented heavily in William E. Leuchtenburg’s “The Supreme Court Reborn: The Constitutional Revolution in the Age of Roosevelt”, he describes the atmosphere of the court as they weighed
…show more content…
As great as the intentions of the Act were, resistance to it lead its challenge all the way up to the Supreme Court where they ruled against it. In the opinion delivered by Justice Roberts said, “The Act is invalid because several of its inseparable provisions contravene the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment” (Lecuhentenburg 37). The Supreme Court decision was one of many cases that dealt blows to some of the New Deal policies. In addition, other Roosevelt’s plans were challenged in courts. One such decision was the “hot oil” provisions of the National Industrial Recovery Act that was found unconstitutional n the decisive 8-1 decision (Lechunhentenburg 85-86). Besides the Supreme Court decision, the case of the Humpbrey’s Executor v. U.S., was more of a decisive blow to President Roosevelt plan during his Presidency. William E. Humphrey was the chair of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Roosevelt wanted him out because he was a thorn in his policies (Lecuhentenburg 52). As a presumed champion of businessperson’s interests, the removal of Humpbrey was justified in Roosevelt opinion, however, the Supreme Court disagreed in the unanimous 9-0 decision against the government (Lecuhentenburg 72). The biggest problem with the Supreme Court decision was that it limited the President’s power in interfering with independent agencies. At this point in Roosevelt’s presidency, many of his goals were challenged with an uncooperative Supreme Court. Ultimately, this led to his aggressive “Court packing” plan that he wanted to take effect in order to guarantee victories for his New Deal
As great as the intentions of the Act were, resistance to it lead its challenge all the way up to the Supreme Court where they ruled against it. In the opinion delivered by Justice Roberts said, “The Act is invalid because several of its inseparable provisions contravene the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment” (Lecuhentenburg 37). The Supreme Court decision was one of many cases that dealt blows to some of the New Deal policies. In addition, other Roosevelt’s plans were challenged in courts. One such decision was the “hot oil” provisions of the National Industrial Recovery Act that was found unconstitutional n the decisive 8-1 decision (Lechunhentenburg 85-86). Besides the Supreme Court decision, the case of the Humpbrey’s Executor v. U.S., was more of a decisive blow to President Roosevelt plan during his Presidency. William E. Humphrey was the chair of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Roosevelt wanted him out because he was a thorn in his policies (Lecuhentenburg 52). As a presumed champion of businessperson’s interests, the removal of Humpbrey was justified in Roosevelt opinion, however, the Supreme Court disagreed in the unanimous 9-0 decision against the government (Lecuhentenburg 72). The biggest problem with the Supreme Court decision was that it limited the President’s power in interfering with independent agencies. At this point in Roosevelt’s presidency, many of his goals were challenged with an uncooperative Supreme Court. Ultimately, this led to his aggressive “Court packing” plan that he wanted to take effect in order to guarantee victories for his New Deal