Meyer v. Nebraska 262 U.S. 390 (1923)

• Author: Kenneth L. Karst
• Pages: 1724

Page 1724

Meyer represented an early use of SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS doctrine to defend personal liberties, as distinguished from economic ones. Nebraska, along with other states, had prohibited the teaching of modern foreign languages to grade school children. Meyer, who taught German in a Lutheran school, was convicted under this law. The Supreme Court, 7?2, held the law unconstitutional. Justice JAMES C. MCREYNOLDS wrote for the Court in Meyer and in four companion cases from Iowa, Ohio, and Nebraska. Justice OLIVER WENDELL HOLMES, joined by Justice GEORGE SUTHERLAND, dissented in all but the Ohio cases.

McReynolds began with a broad reading of the "liberty" protected by the FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT : "it denotes not merely freedom from bodily restraint, but also the right of the individual to contract, to engage in any of the common occupations of life, to acquire useful knowledge, to marry, establish a home and bring up children, to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and, generally, to enjoy those privileges long recognized at common law as essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men." State regulation of this liberty must be reasonably related to a proper state objective; the legislature's view of reasonableness was "subject to supervision by the courts." The legislative purpose to promote assimilation and "civic development" was readily appreciated, given the hostility toward our adversaries in World War I. However, "no adequate reason" justified interfering with Meyer's liberty to teach or the liberty of parents to employ him during a "time of peace and domestic tranquillity."

Holmes concurred in the Ohio cases, because Ohio had singled out the German language for suppression. But he could not say it was unreasonable for a state to forbid teaching...