Summary

Polk Company v. Glover — Opinion of the Court

Legislatures, under our system, determine the necessity for regulatory laws, considering both the evil and the benefits that may result. Unless prohibited by constitutional limitations, their decisions as to policy are final. In weighing conflicting arguments on the wisdom of legislation they are not confined within the narrow boundaries of a particular controversy between litigants.
Source: Wikisource

Polk Company v. Glover — Opinion of the Court

A Florida law designed to prevent fraud, requires that citrus products grown and canned in Florida carry the label, 'Made in Florida' and that containers of these products be embossed with the single word, 'Florida.' The majority do not decide that this State law violates the Federal Constitution. Nor do they decide that proof of the allegations of petitioners' bill of complaint will show that the Florida law violates the Constitution. While petitioners are held entitled to produce evidence, they are not held entitled to relief if they prove their entire bill.
Source: Wikisource

Polk Company v. Glover — Opinion of the Court

The the meantime, the State of Florida is forced to litigate the validity of its duly enacted law, with no decision on its substantial defense that petitioners' bill is wholly defective because of 'insufficiency of fact to constitute a valid cause of action' [1] or 'failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.' [2]
The important consequences of this remand raise far more than mere questions of procedure. State laws are continually subjected to constitutional attacks by those who do not wish to obey them.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature