Talk:Hammer v. Dagenhart

Cleanup
It is my opinion that this article has been "cleaned up". Anyone second, third? Jareha 12:44, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I second that - I just added a few more touches. -- BD2412 talk 13:17, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

Unclear paragraph
I find the following paragraph unclear, enough so that I don't really know how it could be improved. Any suggestions? Jareha 17:34, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
 * "It is purely of state authority and it violates the constitution in two ways. First, it transcends the authority delegated to Congress over commerce. Second, Congress exerts power as to purely local matter to which the federal authority does not extend."

"hello" I don't have any fingers to type with, can some one lend me theirs?

dissent
The reason that I added some additional information from the dissent regarding the long list of articles of commerce that had been banned by Congress is that I think that it gives a flavor of the kinds of distinctions that the Court was making at this time. Any thoughts?

Jvonkorff (talk) 23:21, 18 August 2008 (UTC)