POLICE POWER, in American constitutional law, the re served or inherent powers of the States to legislate for the health, safety and morals of the community. The requirements of the I4th amendment of the U.S. Constitution that no State shall de prive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law and the interpretation of that amendment by the Supreme Court to give it a supervisory jurisdiction over all State legislation restricting the exercise of individual rights, brought to the fore front the concept of police power as a basis for sustaining the exercise of novel State legislation. The ultimate test of constitu tionality under the due-process clause being the arbitrariness to the judicial mind of the State legislation, the relationship between the legislation and the admitted power of State governments to act for the protection of the community in ways reasonably adapted to secure those ends becomes of acute and decisive importance.
Resolving this relationship in terms of traditional concepts of constitutional law, legislation provided that it falls within the police power of the States even though it interferes with property or personal rights does not then run afoul of the due-process clause of the i4th amendment. The ultimate question, of course, re mains, namely the extent of the police power viewed in the light of the object sought to be effected by the legislation and the means devised to secure that object. The extent of the police power re mains as the least defined of State powers. With a political col lectivistic philosophy gradually supplanting the individualistic philosophy of an earlier age, illustrated by the increasing regula tory activities of government, the content of police power becomes an ever-broadening one. Supreme Court decisions reflect this change in later cases that overruled earlier decisions declaring un constitutional State legislation seeking to protect interests not then deemed within the legitimate scope of governmental regulation. The extent of the police power is generally said to embrace the protection of the health, safety and morals of the community.
Regulation of the practice of trades directly related to the health of the community, restrictions upon the use of property for sanita tion purposes, prohibition of immoral amusements, requiring the installation of equipment designed to protect the safety of em ployees or the public, the regulation of traffic, the regulation of hours of labour, are all types of governmental activity within the recognized domain of State legislation. The police power, how
ever, extends to purpose%not so clearly related to the health, safety or morals of the community. The conservation of natural re sources, zoning legislation, the protection of the public against fraud and waste, the enforced destruction of property adapted for illegal uses but capable of permitted uses, are examples of the uncharted scope of the police power. It is commonly said that the police power may not be exercised purely for aesthetic pur poses, but as a better understanding of the organization of society may illustrate an intimate relationship between the promotion of aesthetical ends and general social welfare, the concept of police power may well be enlarged to include purely aesthetic considera tions. The Federal Government is said to possess no general police power. Inasmuch as the Federal Government is one of limited powers and no general power for the protection of the health, safety and inorals of the nation is granted to it under the Constitu tion, such a statement is accurate. But the Federal Government in the exercise of its granted powers may and does act for the promo tion of ends within the concept of police power, and in this sense it has full freedom to protect the health, safety and morals of the community.
There are certain important differences between the exercise of the police power and other inherent State powers. The power of eminent domain, constitutionally restricted to employment for a "public use," can only take property by the payment of just compensation. The exercise of the police power may involve an equal "taking" of property but carries no obligation to compensate for such a taking. Again under the U.S. Constitution no State may pass legislation impairing the obligation of contracts already entered into. State action under the police power may, however, impair the obligation of contracts without conflicting with the con stitutional prohibition, thus "taking" contract as well as property rights without compensation. (See CONSTITUTION AND CONSTITU TIONAL LAW.) See Freund, Police Power (19°4) Burdick, Law of the American Constitution (1922) ; Mott, Due Process of Law (1926) .