OK law makes it illegal for opticians to fitting or duplicating lenses without a prescription.
Procedural History:
SCOTUS held law constitutional.
Issues:
How should the Court view economic regulations?
Holding/Rule:
The Court should generally show great deference to a legislature's economic regulations.
Reasoning:
The law may exact a needless, wasteful requirement in many cases.
But it is for the legislature, not the courts, to balance the advantages and disadvantages of the new requirement.
The legislature might have concluded that the frequency of occasions when a prescriptions is necessary was sufficient to justify this requirement.
The law need not be in every respect logically consistent with its aims to be constitutional.
It is enough that there is an evil at hand for correction, and that it might be thought that the particular legislative measure was a rational way to correct it.
The day is gone when this Court uses the DPC of the 14th Amendment to strike down state laws that regulate economic conditions because they may be unwise, improvident, or out of harmony with a particular school of thought.
For protection against abuses by legislatures, the people must resort to the polls, not to the courts.
