304 U.S. 144 (1938), 640, United States v. Carolene Products Co.

Docket Nº:No. 640
Citation:304 U.S. 144, 58 S.Ct. 778, 82 L.Ed. 1234
Party Name:United States v. Carolene Products Co.
Case Date:April 25, 1938
Court:United States Supreme Court

Page 144

304 U.S. 144 (1938)

58 S.Ct. 778, 82 L.Ed. 1234

United States

v.

Carolene Products Co.

No. 640

United States Supreme Court

April 25, 1938

Argued April 6, 1938

[58 S.Ct. 780] APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Syllabus

The Filled Milk Act of Congress of Mar. 4, 1923, defines the term Filled Milk as meaning any milk, cream, or skimmed milk, whether or not condensed or dried, etc., to which has been added, or which has been blended or compounded with, any fat or oil other than milk fat, so that the resulting product is in imitation or semblance of milk, cream, or skimmed milk, whether or not condensed, dried, etc.; it declares that Filled Milk, as so defined, "is an adulterated article of food, injurious to the public health, and its sale constitutes a fraud upon the public", and it forbids and penalizes the shipment of such Filled Milk in interstate commerce. Defendant was indicted for shipping interstate certain packages of an article described in the indictment as a compound of condensed skimmed milk and coconut oil made in the imitation or semblance of condensed milk or cream, and further characterized by the indictment in the words of the statute, as "an adulterated article of food, injurious to the public health."

Held:

Page 145

1. That upon its face, and as supported by judicial knowledge, including facts found in the reports of the congressional committees, the Act is presumptively within the scope of the power to regulate interstate commerce and consistent with due process. Demurrer to the indictment should have been overruled. Hebe Co. v. Shaw, 248 U.S. 297. P. 147.

2. It is no valid objection that the prohibition of the Act does not extend to oleomargarine or other butter substitutes in which vegetable fats or oils replace butter. P. 151.

3. The statutory characterization of filled milk as injurious to health and as a fraud upon the public may, for the purposes of this case, be considered as a declaration of legislative findings deemed to support the Act as a constitutional exertion of the legislative power, aiding informed judicial review by revealing the rationale of the legislation, as do the reports of legislative committees. P. 152.

7 F.Supp. 500, reversed.

APPEAL under the Criminal Appeals Act from a judgment sustaining a demurrer to an indictment.

STONE, J., lead opinion

MR. JUSTICE STONE delivered the opinion of the Court

The question for decision is whether the "Filled Milk Act" of Congress of March 4, 1923 (c. 262, 42 Stat. 1486, 21 U.S.C. § 61-63),1 which prohibits the shipment in

Page 146

interstate commerce of skimmed milk compounded with any fat or oil other than milk fat, so as to resemble milk or cream, transcends the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce or infringes the Fifth Amendment.

Appellee was indicted in the district court for southern Illinois for violation of the Act by the shipment in interstate commerce of certain packages of "Milnut," a compound of condensed skimmed milk and coconut oil made in imitation or semblance of condensed milk or cream. The indictment states, in the words of the statute, that Milnut "is an adulterated article of food, injurious to the public health," and that it is not a prepared food product of the type excepted from the prohibition of the Act. The trial court sustained a demurrer to the indictment on the authority of an earlier case in the same court, United States v. Carolene Products Co., 7 F.Supp. 500. The case was brought here on appeal under the Criminal Appeals Act of March 2, 1907, 34 Stat. 1246, 18 U.S.C. § 682. The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has meanwhile, in another case, upheld the Filled Milk Act as an appropriate exercise of the commerce power in Carolene Products Co. v. Evaporated Milk Assn., 93 F. (2d) 202.

Appellee assails the statute as beyond the power of Congress over interstate commerce, and hence an invasion of a field of action said to be reserved to the states by the Tenth Amendment. Appellee also complains that the

Page 147

statute denies to it equal [58 S.Ct. 781] protection of the laws and, in violation of the Fifth Amendment, deprives it of its property without due process of law, particularly in that the statute purports to make binding and conclusive upon appellee the legislative declaration that appellee's product "is an adulterated article of food injurious to the public health and its sale constitutes a fraud on the public."

First. The power to regulate commerce is the power "to prescribe the rule by which commerce is to be governed," Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1, 196, and extends to the prohibition of shipments in such commerce. Reid v. Colorado, 187 U.S. 137; Lottery Case, 188 U.S. 321; United States v. Delaware & Hudson Co., 213 U.S. 366; Hope v. United States, 227 U.S. 308; Clark Distilling Co. v. Western Maryland R. Co., 242 U.S. 311; United States v. Hill, 248 U.S. 420; McCormick & Co. v. Brown, 286 U.S. 131. The power "is complete in itself, may be exercised to its utmost extent, and acknowledges no limitations other than are prescribed by the Constitution." Gibbons v. Ogden, supra, 196. Hence, Congress is free to exclude from interstate commerce articles whose use in the states for which they are destined it may reasonably conceive to be injurious to the public health, morals or welfare, Reid v. Colorado, supra; Lottery Case, supra; Hipolite Egg Co. v. United States, 220 U.S. 45; Hope v. United States, supra, or which contravene the policy of the state of their destination. Kentucky Whip & Collar Co. v. Illinois Central R. Co., 299 U.S. 334. Such regulation is not a forbidden invasion of state power either because its motive or its consequence is to restrict the use of articles of commerce within the states of destination, and is not prohibited unless by the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment. And it is no objection to the exertion of the power to regulate interstate commerce that its exercise is attended by the same incidents which attend the exercise of the police power of the states. Seven Cases v. United States, 239 U.S. 510, 514; Hamilton v. Kentucky

Page 148

Distilleries & Warehouse Co., 251 U.S. 146, 156. The prohibition of the shipment of filled milk in interstate commerce is a permissible regulation of commerce, subject only to the restrictions of the Fifth Amendment.

Second. The prohibition of shipment of appellee's product in interstate commerce does not infringe the Fifth Amendment. Twenty years ago, this Court, in Hebe Co. v. Shaw, 248 U.S. 297, held that a state law which forbids the manufacture and sale of a product assumed to be wholesome and nutritive, made of condensed skimmed milk, compounded with coconut oil, is not forbidden by the Fourteenth Amendment. The power of the legislature to secure a minimum of particular nutritive elements in a widely used article of food and to protect the public from fraudulent substitutions was not doubted, and the Court thought that there was ample scope for the legislative judgment that prohibition of the offending article was an appropriate means of preventing injury to the public.

We see no persuasive reason for departing from that ruling here, where the Fifth Amendment is concerned, and since none is suggested, we might rest decision wholly on the presumption of constitutionality. But affirmative evidence also sustains the statute. In twenty years, evidence has steadily accumulated of the danger to the public health from the general consumption of foods which have been stripped of elements essential to the maintenance of health. The Filled Milk Act was adopted by Congress after committee hearings, in the course of which eminent scientists and health experts testified. An extensive investigation was made of the commerce in milk compounds in which vegetable oils have been substituted for natural milk fat, and of the effect upon the public health of the use of such compounds as a food substitute for milk. The conclusions drawn from evidence presented at the hearings were embodied in reports of the

Page 149

House Committee on Agriculture, H.R. No. 365, 67th Cong., 1st Sess., and the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, Sen.Rep. No. 987, 67th Cong., 4th Sess. Both committees concluded, as the statute itself declares, that the use of filled milk as a substitute for pure milk is generally injurious [58 S.Ct. 782] to health and facilitates fraud on the public.2

There is nothing in the Constitution which compels a legislature, either national or state, to ignore such evidence, nor need it disregard the other evidence which amply supports the conclusions of the Congressional committees that the danger is greatly enhanced where an inferior product, like appellee's, is indistinguishable from

Page 150

a valuable food of almost universal use, thus making fraudulent distribution easy and protection of the consumer difficult.3

Page 151

[58 S.Ct. 783] Here, the prohibition of the statute is inoperative unless the product is "in imitation or semblance milk, cream, or skimmed milk, whether or not condensed." Whether in such circumstances the public would be adequately protected by the prohibition of false labels and false branding imposed by the Pure Food and Drugs Act, or whether it was necessary to go farther and prohibit a substitute food product thought to be injurious to health if used as a substitute when the two are not distinguishable, was a matter for the legislative Judgment, and not that of courts. Hebe Co. v. Shaw, supra; South Carolina v. Barnwell Bros. Inc., 303 U.S. 177. It was upon this ground that the prohibition of the sale of oleomargarine made in imitation of butter was held not to infringe the Fourteenth...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP
1661 practice notes
  • 253 F.R.D. 247 (E.D.N.Y. 2008), 03-CV-6049, McMillan v. City of New York
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 2nd Circuit Eastern District of New York
    • October 14, 2008
    ..." Racial" classifications of individuals are " suspect categories," see United States v. Carolene Products Co., 304 U.S. 144, 152 n. 4, 58 S.Ct. 778, 82 L.Ed. 1234 (1938), meaning that state action in reliance on " race" -based statistics triggers strict scruti......
  • 392 F.Supp.3d 935 (S.D.Ind. 2019), 1:19-cv-01660-SEB-DML, Bernard v. Individual Members of Indiana Medical Licensing Board
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 7th Circuit Southern District of Indiana
    • June 28, 2019
    ...554 U.S. 570, 628 n.27, 128 S.Ct. 2783, 171 L.Ed.2d 637 (2008); United States v. Carolene Prods. Co., 304 U.S. 144, 154 n.4, 58 S.Ct. 778, 82 L.Ed. 1234 We begin with (1) the state’s interest in enacting HEA 1211, next considering (2) the burden on women seeking previabi......
  • 488 F.Supp. 433 (W.D.La. 1980), Civ. A. 790317, Johnson v. City of Opelousas
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 5th Circuit Western District of Louisiana
    • April 16, 1980
    ...(than when it involves regulatory legislation affecting ordinary commerce transactions). United States v. Carolene Products Company, 304 U.S. 144, 58 S.Ct. 778, 82 L.Ed. 1234, Footnote 4 The Court, in Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11, 25 S.Ct. 358, 49 L.Ed. 643 (1905) sustaining Massa......
  • 49 F.Supp.2d 937 (W.D.Tex. 1999), C. A. SA-98-CA-1011, Rothe Development Corp. v. United States Dept. of Defense
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 5th Circuit Southern District of Texas
    • April 27, 1999
    ...13 L.Ed.2d 222 (1964); Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214, 216, 65 S.Ct. 193, 89 L.Ed. 194 (1944); United States v. Carolene Prods., 304 U.S. 144, 152-53 n. 4, 58 S.Ct. 778, 82 L.Ed. 1234 (1938). Under this level of review, a governmental classification is unconstitutional unless it i......
  • Free signup to view additional results
1244 cases
  • 253 F.R.D. 247 (E.D.N.Y. 2008), 03-CV-6049, McMillan v. City of New York
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 2nd Circuit Eastern District of New York
    • October 14, 2008
    ..." Racial" classifications of individuals are " suspect categories," see United States v. Carolene Products Co., 304 U.S. 144, 152 n. 4, 58 S.Ct. 778, 82 L.Ed. 1234 (1938), meaning that state action in reliance on " race" -based statistics triggers strict scruti......
  • 392 F.Supp.3d 935 (S.D.Ind. 2019), 1:19-cv-01660-SEB-DML, Bernard v. Individual Members of Indiana Medical Licensing Board
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 7th Circuit Southern District of Indiana
    • June 28, 2019
    ...554 U.S. 570, 628 n.27, 128 S.Ct. 2783, 171 L.Ed.2d 637 (2008); United States v. Carolene Prods. Co., 304 U.S. 144, 154 n.4, 58 S.Ct. 778, 82 L.Ed. 1234 We begin with (1) the state’s interest in enacting HEA 1211, next considering (2) the burden on women seeking previabi......
  • 488 F.Supp. 433 (W.D.La. 1980), Civ. A. 790317, Johnson v. City of Opelousas
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 5th Circuit Western District of Louisiana
    • April 16, 1980
    ...(than when it involves regulatory legislation affecting ordinary commerce transactions). United States v. Carolene Products Company, 304 U.S. 144, 58 S.Ct. 778, 82 L.Ed. 1234, Footnote 4 The Court, in Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11, 25 S.Ct. 358, 49 L.Ed. 643 (1905) sustaining Massa......
  • 49 F.Supp.2d 937 (W.D.Tex. 1999), C. A. SA-98-CA-1011, Rothe Development Corp. v. United States Dept. of Defense
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 5th Circuit Southern District of Texas
    • April 27, 1999
    ...13 L.Ed.2d 222 (1964); Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214, 216, 65 S.Ct. 193, 89 L.Ed. 194 (1944); United States v. Carolene Prods., 304 U.S. 144, 152-53 n. 4, 58 S.Ct. 778, 82 L.Ed. 1234 (1938). Under this level of review, a governmental classification is unconstitutional unless it i......
  • Free signup to view additional results
4 firm's commentaries
  • Supreme Court ruling confirming the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • June 28, 2010
    ...U. S. 294, 303 (1964); Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States, 379 U. S. 241, 258 (1964); United States v. Carolene Products Co., 304 U. S. 144, 152–153 (1938). In answering thesequestions, we presume the statute under review is constitutional and may strike it down only on a “plain ......
  • Constitutional Limitations On Emergency Authority
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • April 29, 2020
    ...Ctr., 473 U.S. 432, 440 (1985). [xxvii] D.C. v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 628 n.27 (2008) (quoting United States v. Carolene Products Co., 304 U.S. 144, 152 n.4 (1938)) (“There may be narrower scope for operation of the presumption of constitutionality [i.e., narrower than that provided by rati......
  • No Boundaries: The Erosion of Private Property Rights by Judicial Deference to Regulatory Overreach
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • October 5, 2017
    ...v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U.S. 365, 47 S. Ct. 114, 71 L. Ed. 303, 4 Ohio L. Abs. 816 (1926). 2See, e.g., U.S. v. Carolene Products Co., 304 U.S. 144, 58 S. Ct. 778, 82 L. Ed. 1234 (1938). 3Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., supra, 272 U.S. at 395 (1926). See also Christensen v. Yolo Co......
  • Federal Court Ruling that the NYPD’s “Stop and Frisk” Program Violates the Fourth Amendment
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • August 12, 2013
    ...the department’s stop-and-frisk practices are consistent with the Constitution.” Id. at 20 (citing United States v. Carolene Prods. Co., 304 U.S. 144, 152 n.4 (1938)). If it is true that 76% percent of black voters in New York City disapprove of stop and frisk, as found in a recent Quinnipi......
400 books & journal articles