Editing Charles Evans Hughes (section)

===Roosevelt takes office===
During [[Presidency of Herbert Hoover|Hoover's presidency]], the country plunged into the [[Great Depression in the United States|Great Depression]].<ref>{{harvnb|ps=.|Simon|2012|p=186}}</ref> As the country faced an ongoing economic calamity, [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]] decisively defeated Hoover in the [[1932 United States presidential election|1932 presidential election]].<ref>{{harvnb|ps=.|Shesol|2010|p=37}}</ref> Responding to the [[Great Depression in the United States|Great Depression]], Roosevelt passed a bevy of domestic legislation as part of his [[New Deal]] domestic program, and the response to the New Deal became one of the key issues facing the Hughes Court. In the [[Gold Clause Cases]], a series of cases that presented some of the first major tests of New Deal laws, the Hughes Court upheld the voiding of the "gold clauses" in private and public contracts that was favored by the Roosevelt administration.<ref name="L11891192"/> Roosevelt, who had expected the Supreme Court to rule adversely to his administration's position, was elated by the outcome, writing that "as a lawyer it seems to me that the Supreme Court has at last definitely put human values ahead of the 'pound of flesh' called for by a contract."<ref>{{harvnb|ps=.|Simon|2012|pp=254–257}}</ref> The Hughes Court also continued to adjudicate major cases concerning the states. In the 1934 case of ''[[Home Building & Loan Ass'n v. Blaisdell]]'', Hughes and Roberts joined the Three Musketeers in upholding a Minnesota law that established a moratorium on mortgage payments.<ref name="L11891192">{{harvnb|ps=.|Leuchtenburg|2005|pp=1189–1192}}</ref> Hughes's majority opinion in that case stated that "while an emergency does not create power, an emergency may furnish the occasion for the exercise of power."<ref>{{harvnb|ps=.|Simon|2012|pp=246–247}}</ref>[[File:Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes.jpg|thumb|Portrait of Hughes as Chief Justice]]Beginning with the 1935 case of ''[[Railroad Retirement Board v. Alton Railroad Co.]]'', Roberts started siding with the Four Horsemen, creating a majority bloc that struck down New Deal laws.<ref name="L1192"/> The court held that Congress had, in passing an act that provided a mandatory retirement and pension system for railroad industry workers, violated due process and exceeded the regulatory powers granted to it by the [[Commerce Clause]].<ref>{{harvnb|ps=.|Simon|2012|pp=257–258}}</ref> Hughes strongly criticized Roberts's majority opinion in his dissent, writing that "the power committed to Congress to govern interstate commerce does not require that its government should be wise, much less that it be perfect. The power implies a broad discretion."<ref name="L1192"/> Nonetheless, in May 1935, the Supreme Court unanimously struck down three New Deal laws. Writing the majority opinion in ''[[A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States]]'', Hughes held that Roosevelt's [[National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933]] was doubly unconstitutional, falling afoul of both the Commerce Clause and the [[nondelegation doctrine]].<ref name="L1192">{{harvnb|ps=.|Leuchtenburg|2005|pp=1192–1193}}</ref>

In the 1936 case of ''[[United States v. Butler]]'', Hughes surprised many observers by joining with Roberts and the Four Horsemen in striking down the [[Agricultural Adjustment Act]].<ref>{{harvnb|ps=.|Leuchtenburg|2005|pp=1193–1194}}</ref> In doing so, the court dismantled the Agricultural Adjustment Administration, the major New Deal agricultural program.<ref>{{harvnb|ps=.|Simon|2012|pp=273–274, 282}}</ref> In another 1936 case, ''[[Carter v. Carter Coal Co.]]'', the Supreme Court struck down the [[Guffey Coal Act]], which regulated the [[bituminous coal]] industry. Hughes wrote a concurring opinion in ''Carter'' in which he agreed with the majority's holding that Congress could not use its Commerce Clause powers to "regulate activities and relations within the states which affect interstate commerce only indirectly." In the final case of the 1936 term, ''Morehead v. New York ex rel. Tipaldo'', Roberts joined with the Four Horsemen in striking down New York's minimum wage law.<ref>{{harvnb|ps=.|Leuchtenburg|2005|p=1195}}</ref> President Roosevelt had held up the New York minimum wage law as a model for other states to follow, and many Republicans as well as Democrats attacked the decision for interfering with the states.<ref>{{harvnb|ps=.|Simon|2012|pp=289–291}}</ref> In December 1936, the court handed down its near-unanimous opinion in ''[[United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp.]]'', upholding a law that granted the president the power to place an arms embargo on [[Bolivia]] and [[Paraguay]]. Justice Sutherland's majority opinion, which Hughes joined, explained that the Constitution had granted the president broad powers to conduct foreign policy.<ref>{{harvnb|ps=.|Simon|2012|p=303}}</ref>