Bourjois, Inc. v. Chapman - 301 U.S. 183 (1937)


U.S. Supreme Court

Bourjois, Inc. v. Chapman, 301 U.S. 183 (1937)

Bourjois, Inc. v. Chapman

No. 534

Argued March 5, 1937

Decided April 26, 1937

301 U.S. 183

Syllabus

1. A state law requiring, as a health measure, that cosmetic preparations be registered before being offered for sale in the State, which applies only to those who deal in or apply the preparations within the State, and which does not demand that the application for registration be made by the manufacturer or proprietor, but permits any person interested to make it, does not infringe the rights, under the commerce clause, of one whose preparations are manufactured in another State and there sold to customers who deal in or apply them in the State requiring the registration. P. 301 U. S. 186.

2. A state inspection fee will not be adjudged a direct burden on interstate commerce where not unreasonable on its face and where, because of the recent adoption of the regulation involved, it is impossible to know whether it will yield in excess of the administrative requirement. P. 301 U. S. 187.

3. Where interstate commerce is only indirectly affected, the burden of proving that state inspection fees will actually burden such commerce rests upon him who challenges the legislation. The mere fact that the fees imposed might exceed the cost of inspection is immaterial. P. 301 U. S. 187.

4. A state statute imposing fees for the enforcement of a regulation affecting but one class of activity, the fees and expenditures being entered in a separate account, presents no question under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. P. 301 U. S. 188.

5. A Maine statute requires that cosmetics offered for sale in the State be registered, penalizes sale without registration, and empowers a Board to

"regulate or to refuse the issuance of certificates of registration or to prohibit the sale of cosmetic preparations which in its judgment contain injurious substances in such amounts as to be poisonous, injurious, or detrimental to the person."

Held:

(1) It will not be assumed, as a basis for attack under the Fourteenth Amendment or the state constitution, that one who has not applied for it will be refused a certificate, or that the Board will deny any right to which he is entitled. P. 301 U. S. 188.

Page 301 U. S. 184

(2) The delegation of power to the Board is not obnoxious to the State constitution or the Fourteenth Amendment. P. 301 U. S. 189.

(3) Due process is safeguarded by a provision of the statute for judicial review when the Board refuses a certificate. Id.

(4) The question whether provisions of the statute concerning seizure and forfeiture of unregistered cosmetics violate the constitution of Maine does not arise in the case of a manufacturer whose goods are disposed of to others in another State before they enter Maine. P. 301 U. S. 190.

Affirmed.

Appeal from a decree of the District Court of three judges dismissing the bill in a suit to enjoin enforcement of a statute requiring registration of cosmetic preparations offered for sale, etc.



Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.