300 U.S. 379 (1937)
West Coast Hotel Co. v.
Did the Washington state minimum wage law violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause by infringing on the right to contract?
The legal principle established in West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish is that the state has the authority to regulate economic matters, including setting minimum wage laws, in the interest of public welfare. This case marked a significant shift from the Lochner era's emphasis on economic liberty and freedom of contract to a recognition of the state's role in protecting workers and promoting social welfare. The Court held that the government could intervene in private contracts when such intervention serves a legitimate public purpose.
The Supreme Court held that the Washington state minimum wage law was constitutional and did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court reversed the decision of the Washington Supreme Court, affirming the state's authority to regulate wages in the interest of public welfare. The majority opinion, delivered by Justice Hughes, reasoned that the law was a valid exercise of the state's police powers and was necessary to protect the health and welfare of women workers, who were often in economically vulnerable positions.
West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish is a cornerstone case in the evolution of constitutional law regarding economic regulation and labor rights. It effectively ended the Lochner era, during which the Supreme Court frequently invalidated economic regulations on the grounds of individual liberty and freedom of contract. The case's ruling established a precedent for the constitutionality of minimum wage laws and other forms of economic regulation aimed at protecting workers.