Justice Pierce Butler's Constitutional Interpretation Mode

Pierce Butler, a staunch conservative and devout Catholic, served as an associate justice of the US Supreme Court from 1923 until his death in 1939. He was a strict constitutional constructionist, emphasizing limiting government power and opposing federal regulation of business and welfare programs. Butler's interpretation of the Constitution was evident in his votes against New Deal measures, state and federal taxes, and the rights of the government to regulate prices. He was part of a conservative bloc known as the Four Horsemen, which included Justices James Clark McReynolds, George Sutherland, and Willis Van Devanter. This group repeatedly struck down New Deal legislation and other economic regulations, with Butler voting against the constitutionality of every New Deal measure that came before the Court.

Explore related products

Constitutional Interpretation: Textual Meaning, Original Intent, and Judicial Review

$25.58 $37.99

American Constitutional Interpretation (University Casebook Series)

$285

Constitutional Interpretation: The Basic Questions

$17 $31.49

The Challenge of Originalism: Theories of Constitutional Interpretation

$41.97 $53

A Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and the Law - New Edition (The University Center for Human Values Series)

$18.49 $19.95

How to Argue the Constitution with a Conservative

$7.99 $14.99

Justice Pierce Butler's conservative interpretation

Pierce Butler, a Democrat and devout Catholic, was a strict constitutional constructionist and conservative justice of the US Supreme Court. He was part of a conservative bloc on the Court known as the Four Horsemen, joining Justices James Clark McReynolds, George Sutherland, and Willis Van Devanter. This group consistently voted as a conservative bloc, repeatedly striking down New Deal legislation and other economic regulations on constitutional grounds. Butler's conservatism was characterised by his emphasis on limiting the power of government. He opposed government control of business and voted against the imposition of state and federal taxes, arguing against the right of the government to regulate prices. During the Great Depression, he ruled against the constitutionality of many "New Deal" laws, including the Agricultural Adjustment Administration and the National Recovery Administration.

In United States v. Schwimmer, Butler wrote the majority opinion, denying citizenship to a 60-year-old woman, Rosika Schwimmer, because she refused to take an oath to "take up arms" for her country. He interpreted her statement as opposition to the entire Constitution and the laws of the country. In Coolidge v. Long, he argued that a state inheritance tax was unconstitutional as it violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Butler also had a notable career before his appointment to the Supreme Court. He was admitted to the Minnesota bar in 1888 and served as assistant county attorney and then county attorney in St. Paul. He then formed a law firm and became the foremost railroad attorney in the Northwest. He was occasionally called upon to prosecute antitrust cases for President William Howard Taft's attorney general, George Wickersham. In 1908, he became the President of the Minnesota State Bar Association, and he served as a Regent of the University of Minnesota from 1907 to 1924.

Despite his conservatism, Butler landed on the right side of history in two notable cases. In the notorious 1927 case of Buck v. Bell, he disagreed with all of his fellow Justices, finding that the Constitution did not permit the compulsory sterilisation of people in state institutions with hereditary insanity or imbecility. Additionally, in a case involving wiretapping by Prohibition agents, Olmstead v. United States, he joined the more liberal justices in finding that law enforcement wiretapping constituted an illegal search and seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment.

Opposition to government control

Pierce Butler was a strict constitutional constructionist and a conservative who advocated for a laissez-faire philosophy, minimising government interference in the economy. He was a Democrat and a Catholic, and he joined a conservative bloc on the Court known as the Four Horsemen, along with Justices James Clark McReynolds, George Sutherland, and Willis Van Devanter. Butler's conservatism was particularly evident in his efforts to limit the power of the government.

Butler consistently voted against state and federal taxes, arguing that they violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which guarantees due process of law before the state deprives a person of liberty. He also opposed government control of business and voted against the rights of the government to regulate prices. In Coolidge v. Long, he wrote the Court's opinion, arguing that a state inheritance tax was unconstitutional due to its violation of the Due Process Clause.

Butler's opposition to government control extended to his dissent in the case of Olmstead v. United States, where he argued that law enforcement wiretapping constituted an illegal search for evidence and violated the Fourth Amendment. He also voted against the constitutionality of Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal policies, which aimed to increase government power. Specifically, he voted against two important New Deal programs: the Agricultural Adjustment Administration and the National Recovery Administration.

In United States v. Schwimmer, Butler wrote the majority opinion, denying citizenship to Rosika Schwimmer because she refused to take an oath to "take up arms" for her country. He interpreted her statement as opposition to the entire Constitution and the laws of the country. This interpretation, along with his consistent voting record, showcases his stance on limiting government control and his strict interpretation of the Constitution.

Voting record on taxes

I found information on two people named Pierce Butler:

Pierce Butler (1744-1822)

Pierce Butler, born in 1744, was an Irish-born American politician and one of the Founding Fathers of the United States. He served as a delegate to the 1787 Constitutional Convention and was a signatory to the Constitution. Butler was also a member of the United States Senate, serving three terms from 1789 to 1796, and from 1802 to 1804. He was a large slaveholder and frequently defended American slavery.

Pierce Butler (1866-1939)

Pierce Butler, born in 1866, was an associate justice of the United States Supreme Court from 1923 to 1939. He was a strict constitutional constructionist and a member of the conservative bloc on the Court known as the Four Horsemen. This group consistently voted against government control of business and opposed the imposition of state and federal taxes. They also struck down New Deal legislation and other economic regulations on constitutional grounds.

This answer focuses on the voting record on taxes of the latter Pierce Butler, the associate justice of the Supreme Court.

Pierce Butler consistently opposed the imposition of state and federal taxes during his tenure as a Supreme Court justice. As a member of the conservative bloc, he joined the majority in voting down two significant New Deal programs: the Agricultural Adjustment Administration and the National Recovery Administration. Butler's voting record on taxes aligned with his strict interpretation of the Constitution and his opposition to government intervention in business and economic affairs.

In addition to his stance on taxes, Butler's conservative voting record extended to other economic and regulatory issues. He consistently voted against government control of business and sided with the conservative bloc in striking down New Deal legislation. This voting record placed him on the conservative end of the political spectrum during his time on the Court.

While Butler's voting record on taxes and economic issues was consistent with his interpretation of the Constitution, it is important to note that his approach was later repudiated by the Court. Towards the end of his tenure, the Court moved away from the strict constructionist interpretation favored by Butler and the Four Horsemen, highlighting the evolving nature of constitutional interpretation over time.

Explore related products

The Silent Prologue: How Judicial Philosophies Shape Our Constitutional Rights

$24.99

The Nature of the Judicial Process

$5.69 $8.95

Law, Morality and Judicial Reasoning: Essays on W. J. Waluchow’s Jurisprudence and Constitutional Theory (Law and Philosophy Library Book 147)

$129.99 $129.99

Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial

$15.95

The Evolution of a Judicial Philosophy: Selected Opinions and Papers of Justice John M. Harlan

$65

Judicial Character in Hard Times: On the Role of Judicial Virtues in Defending the Rule of Law (IVR Studies in the Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy)

$143.81

Views on business regulation

Justice Pierce Butler was a strict constitutional constructionist. He was a conservative Democrat and a devout Catholic. As an associate justice, he vigorously opposed business regulation and the implementation of welfare programs by the federal government, deeming them unconstitutional. He was against government control of business and consistently voted against the imposition of state and federal taxes. He joined the conservative bloc of justices Willis Van Devanter, James C. McReynolds, and George Sutherland, in voting down New Deal programs and economic regulations.

Butler's opposition to business regulation was evident in his dissenting opinion in the 1927 Buck v. Bell case. He disagreed with his fellow justices, who ruled that the Constitution permitted the compulsory sterilization of people in state institutions with hereditary insanity or imbecility. This decision has since been abandoned, and Butler's dissenting view is now considered correct.

In another case, Hess v. Pawloski (1927), Butler's interpretation of the Due Process Clause indicated his preference for state power over individual rights. He ruled that due process does not prevent a state from holding a non-resident motorist accountable under the law for accidents that occur within the state.

Butler's conservative bloc, known as the "Four Horsemen," repeatedly struck down New Deal legislation and other economic regulations, often convincing fellow justices to form a majority against new property regulations. They protected property rights and contractual rights, viewing many New Deal laws as unconstitutional violations of the delegation powers or the interstate commerce clause.

However, towards the end of his tenure, the Court repudiated their approach, leaving Butler on the wrong side of history regarding business regulation and economic policies.

Stance on welfare programs

Pierce Butler (1866-1939) was an associate justice of the United States Supreme Court, appointed by President Warren G. Harding in 1922. He was a strict constitutional constructionist, voting with the conservative bloc of justices on many issues.

Butler vigorously opposed the regulation of business and the implementation of welfare programs by the federal government, deeming them unconstitutional. During the Great Depression, he ruled against the constitutionality of many "New Deal" laws, including the Agricultural Adjustment Administration and the National Recovery Administration. These programs were designed to provide economic relief and support to Americans struggling in the wake of the stock market crash.

Butler's stance on welfare programs was rooted in his conservative interpretation of the Constitution. He believed that the federal government should not intervene in business and economic affairs, and that such matters should be left to the free market. He consistently voted against the imposition of state and federal taxes, which could have been used to fund social welfare initiatives.

During his time on the Supreme Court, Butler authored a significant number of majority and minority opinions. In one notable case, United States v. Schwimmer, he wrote the majority opinion denying a Hungarian immigrant's application for citizenship because she refused to take an oath to "take up arms" for the United States. This case reflects Butler's strict interpretation of the Constitution and his belief in prioritizing national security over individual circumstances.

In another case, Buck v. Bell, Butler was the sole dissenter, disagreeing with his fellow justices who ruled that the Constitution permitted the compulsory sterilization of people in state institutions with hereditary insanity or "feeble-mindedness." This decision has been widely criticized and, while not explicitly overturned, it has been abandoned in practice.

Overall, Pierce Butler's stance on welfare programs was characterized by his strict interpretation of the Constitution, opposition to government intervention in business and economic affairs, and prioritization of conservative values. His rulings and opinions had a significant impact on the course of American social and economic policy during his time on the Supreme Court.

Frequently asked questions