Matches in DBpedia 2014 for { <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Hammer_v._Dagenhart> ?p ?o. }
Showing items 1 to 54 of
54
with 100 items per page.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart abstract "Hammer v. Dagenhart, 247 U.S. 251 (1918), was a United States Supreme Court decision involving the power of Congress to enact child labor laws. The Court held regulation of child labor in purely internal (to a single state) manufacturing, the products of which may never enter interstate commerce, to be beyond the power of Congress, distinguishing the Lottery line of cases, which concerned Congressional regulation of harms (e.g. interstate sale of lottery tickets) that required the use of interstate commerce.".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart wikiPageExternalLink 251.html.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart wikiPageExternalLink child-with-a-hoe-pb-but-if.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart wikiPageID "545934".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart wikiPageRevisionID "602948120".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart arguedatea "--04-15".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart arguedateb "16".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart argueyear "1918".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart citation "38".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart decidedate "--06-03".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart decideyear "1918".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart dissent "Holmes".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart fullname "Hammer, United States Attorney for the Western District of North Carolina v. Dagenhart, et al.".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart hasPhotoCollection Hammer_v._Dagenhart.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart holding "Congress has no power under the Commerce Clause to regulate labor conditions.".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart joindissent "McKenna, Brandeis, Clarke".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart joinmajority "White, Pitney, Van Devanter, McReynolds".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart lawsapplied "Keating-Owen Act of 1916; Commerce Clause of the U.S. Const.".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart litigants "Hammer v. Dagenhart".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart majority "Day".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart overruled "United States v. Darby Lumber Co.,".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart prior "Appeal from the District of the United States for the Western District of North Carolina".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart scotus "1916".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart uspage "251".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart usvol "247".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart subject Category:1918_in_United_States_case_law.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart subject Category:Overruled_United_States_Supreme_Court_decisions.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart subject Category:United_States_Commerce_Clause_case_law.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart subject Category:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart subject Category:United_States_labor_case_law.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart type Abstraction100002137.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart type Act100030358.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart type Action100037396.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart type Choice100161243.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart type Decision100162632.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart type Event100029378.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart type OverruledUnitedStatesSupremeCourtDecisions.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart type PsychologicalFeature100023100.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart type YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntity.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart type Case.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart type LegalCase.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart type SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart type UnitOfWork.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart type Event.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart type Situation.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart comment "Hammer v. Dagenhart, 247 U.S. 251 (1918), was a United States Supreme Court decision involving the power of Congress to enact child labor laws. The Court held regulation of child labor in purely internal (to a single state) manufacturing, the products of which may never enter interstate commerce, to be beyond the power of Congress, distinguishing the Lottery line of cases, which concerned Congressional regulation of harms (e.g.".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart label "Hammer v. Dagenhart".
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart sameAs m.02np73.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart sameAs Q5645676.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart sameAs Q5645676.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart sameAs Hammer_v._Dagenhart.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart wasDerivedFrom Hammer_v._Dagenhart?oldid=602948120.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart isPrimaryTopicOf Hammer_v._Dagenhart.
- Hammer_v._Dagenhart name "Hammer, United States Attorney for the Western District of North Carolina v. Dagenhart, et al.".