McNaughton v. Johnson,
242 U.S. 344 (1917)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

McNaughton v. Johnson, 242 U.S. 344 (1917)

McNaughton v. Johnson

No. 494

Argued December 12, 1916

Decided January 8, 1917

242 U.S. 344


The practice of fitting glasses to the human eye and treating ocular inflammation without the use of drugs or surgery is subject to supervision and regulation under the state police power.

Page 242 U. S. 345

No discrimination violative of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is deducible from the fact that a state law (Laws of California, 1913, c. 598) requiring persons treating inflammation of the eye and fitting glasses without the use of drugs to be licensed under the name of "optometrists" and subjecting their practice to regulation excepts persons who employ drugs in their practice, it appearing that the latter, through another statute, are subject to similar supervision and regulation under another name.

233 F. 334 affirmed.

The case is stated in the opinion.

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law 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.