The Judiciary vs. The Industrial Worker
A fiery critique of judicial interference in workers' compensation laws, framing court-made obstacles as a betrayal of popular rights.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
The New York court of appeals has decided in its wisdom that the legislature cannot enact a law which insures compensation to employees injured in the course of their work and to the families of those who are killed. The utmost that can be done is to sweep away some of the judge-made defenses behind which employers have shielded themselves in damage suits. We now learn that when the lawmakers determine to enact a law which is in principle measurably abreast of those of the most backward countries of Europe, they are not to be allowed to do anything of the kind. Employers cannot even by statute be required to assume the risks of their trade. If we must amend the state and federal constitutions before we can enact a compensation law, providing such financial compensation to the sufferers in the Washington fire, as would be theirs if the disaster had happened in any civilized country except ours, this will not be because any constitutional convention or any popular vote has ever so decreed. It is because legal rights have been transformed into judicial wrongs.
“If this bulwark of liberty is by judicial interpretation to become one more obstacle in the way of rational legislation, the sooner it is swept out of the constitution and out of the judicial mind, the better for all concerned.”
This 1911 critique of the 'due process' doctrine being weaponized to block labor protections captures a tension that remains central to American constitutional debate. Just as the author argued for legislative power over industrial safety, contemporary advocates for worker protections continue to navigate legal landscapes shaped by precedents that often favor corporate liability limits over human safety.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.