Question

Why did the Supreme Court consider the National Industrial Recovery Act to be unconstitutional?

Answer 1

Answer:

To quote Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes, "Section 3 of the Recovery Act (15 USCA 703) is without precedent. It supplies no standards for any trade, industry, or activity. It does not undertake to prescribe rules of conduct to be applied to particular states of fact determined by appropriate administrative procedure. Instead of prescribing rules of conduct, it authorizes the making of codes to prescribe them. For that legislative undertaking, section 3 sets up no standards, aside from the statement of the general aims of rehabilitation, correction, and expansion described in section 1. In view of the scope of that broad declaration and of the nature of the few restrictions that are imposed, the discretion of the President in approving or prescribing codes, and thus enacting laws for the government of trade and industry throughout the country, is virtually unfettered. We think that the code-making authority thus conferred is an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power."

Explanation:

Hope this helped!

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Industrial_Recovery_Act_of_1933

Answer 2

Answer:

It was unconstitutional

Explanation: