Connally v. General Construction Co.

http://dbpedia.org/resource/Connally_v._General_Construction_Co. an entity of type: Thing

Connally v. General Construction Co., 269 U.S. 385 (1926), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court expanded and established key constructs of the Fourteenth Amendment's due process doctrine along with establishing the vagueness doctrine. It defined necessary requirements that are fundamental to any law, which, when lacking, are to be deemed void. The case was a dispute regarding Oklahoma state statutes, which, in essence vaguely required businesses to pay workers not less than the "current rate of per diem wages in the locality where the work is performed". The ruling determined that the standards set in place were unconstitutionally vague. rdf:langString
rdf:langString Connally v. General Construction Co.
rdf:langString Connally contro General Construction Co.
rdf:langString
rdf:langString Connally, Commissioner, et. al. v. General Construction Company
xsd:integer 47760786
xsd:integer 1053376651
rdf:langString Van Devanter, McReynolds, Butler
rdf:langString Taft, Holmes, Stone, Brandeis, Sanford
xsd:integer 46
xsd:integer 385
xsd:integer 269
xsd:integer 1925
rdf:langString Connally v. General Construction Co.,
xsd:gMonthDay --01-04
xsd:integer 1926
rdf:langString Connally, Commissioner, et. al. v. General Construction Company
rdf:langString The court ruled that the provisions in question were void for unconstitutional vagueness.
rdf:langString Connally v. General Construction Co.
rdf:langString Sutherland
rdf:langString Connally v. General Construction Co., 269 U.S. 385 (1926), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court expanded and established key constructs of the Fourteenth Amendment's due process doctrine along with establishing the vagueness doctrine. It defined necessary requirements that are fundamental to any law, which, when lacking, are to be deemed void. The case was a dispute regarding Oklahoma state statutes, which, in essence vaguely required businesses to pay workers not less than the "current rate of per diem wages in the locality where the work is performed". The ruling determined that the standards set in place were unconstitutionally vague.
xsd:gMonthDay --11-30
xsd:gMonthDay --12-01
xsd:nonNegativeInteger 3573

data from the linked data cloud