Tuesday, January 18, 2011

Commerce Clause For Alarm, Part 4

Newly minted GOP Sen. Mike Lee of Utah is leading the next great charge in wingnut legal philosophy, as Steven D points out.

Guess who wants federal child labor laws banned? The newly elected Senator Mike Lee of Utah, who is, it goes without saying a Republican. In short, he believes that federal laws that ban child labor are unconstitutional.

Lee's reasoning was that labor and manufacturing are "by their very nature, local activities" and not "interstate commercial transactions." He added: "This may sound harsh, but it was designed to be that way. It was designed to be a little bit harsh." 
The key Congressional law that addresses child labor is the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, which placed a series of restrictions against the employment of people under 18 in the public and private sectors.
By this same reasoning any law involving worker safety, the minimum wage, limitations on hours worked per day and week, etc. are also unconstitutional as being strictly local matters that only the states may regulate. Indeed, industrial pollution that cannot be shown to have migrated across state borders might also be considered unconstitutional, as would federal laws demanding an environmental impact statement before commercial or industrial development, regardless of how dangerous the planned activities might be, or how damaging to the environment. 

And that's certainly Lee's final thrust:  the notion that all commerce in the United States is local and therefore doesn't fall under the Congress and the Commerce Clause.

This avenue of attack is much larger that just child labor laws.  It aims to nullify all federal labor laws, period.  Lee's logic isn't just unsound...it's the entire point.

What I don't get is why are they using child labor laws as unconstitutional?  Somehow I doubt that's a winning argument with America's parents, or with people who don't even have kids for that matter.  I could understand going after the minimum wage because you can at least smokescreen it by saying it will increase wages for those not making minimum wage, and play up the "poor small businessman and his labor costs" angle.

But there's no real winning argument to "Hey, you should have the right to let kids play with iron smelters!"

Why focusing on child labor laws?  That I don't get.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Ah, it'll toughen em up! A little lawn mowing here, some paper delivery there, maybe some chimney sweeping or coal mining - it'll prepare them for the real world, when those skills will earn them the big bucks!

Davis X. Machina said...

Ignorance, or to be charitable, partial knowledge.

He cudgeled his brain, and came up with the first example -- not the best, not the most recent -- he could come up with where Federal legislation had pre-empted a local economic regulation that popped into his head, is my guess.

To the congenitally bloody-minded, child labor would come to mind first...

Related Posts with Thumbnails