Constitutional Principle, Partisan Calculation, and the Beveridge Child Labor Bill

Law and History Review 31 (2013): 325-353

Posted: 19 Jul 2013

Date Written: May 1, 2013

Abstract

Senator Albert Beveridge’s fight for a federal child labor law in 1906-08 strikingly exemplifies the independent effect of constitutionalism on Progressive Era politics. Narrower studies of child labor reform and broader examinations of party and legislative politics in the Progressive Era portray constitutional argument in Congress as rhetorical cover for ‘real’ political preferences. That approach, however, cannot explain why Beveridge embraced the central constitutional argument against a child labor bill he believed would launch his political career and transform his GOP into a dominant progressive party.

Beveridge believed it was appropriate for him to develop his own constitutional vision. He thus pushed the limits of constitutional federalism in directions that supported his political preferences. But he did not extend that challenge to another legal principle that was too clear to ignore and too popular to reject. That principle – that any legitimate regulation of interstate commerce could not, by definition, interfere with liberty of contract – had implications that led to the defeat of his bill. By choosing the integrity of that principle over political expediency, Beveridge reveals a form of constitutional politics that is not just about politics, but about the subtle and contextual interaction of politics and legal doctrine.

Suggested Citation

Sawyer, Logan Everett, Constitutional Principle, Partisan Calculation, and the Beveridge Child Labor Bill (May 1, 2013). Law and History Review 31 (2013): 325-353, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2294958

Logan Everett Sawyer (Contact Author)

University of Georgia School of Law ( email )

225 Herty Drive
Athens, GA 30602
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
510
PlumX Metrics