“If Roe v. Wade can fall, anything can fall.”

– House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries

The Threat

In the past three years, 28 state legislatures have introduced bills weakening child labor laws, with 12 enacting them.

In Arkansas, a new law eliminates age verification requirements for employers. In Iowa, Republican legislators passed a law permitting 14-year-olds to work on factory assembly lines and meatpacking facilities–a direct violation of federal child labor laws.

In Wisconsin, the Republican-controlled state legislature lifted restrictions on work hours during the school year, though Democrat Governor Tony Evers vetoed the legislation.

And in Ohio, the state Senate passed a similar bill unanimously.

The conservative argument has long been brewing. Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich called child labor laws “stupid” in 2011. Utah Senator Mike Lee has gone as far as calling child labor laws “unconstitutional,” preferring the 1918 interpretation of the Commerce Clause to the FLSA’s 1941 ruling.

The Courts

The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the New Deal-era legislation which ended oppressive child labor, relies on an expanded view of the Commerce Clause–an expansion which Justice Clarence Thomas, America’s preeminent originalist expressed disdain for nearly three decades ago.

Now at the height of his power, Justice Thomas has shown his comfort with a narrower view of the legal backing upon which the FLSA rests. “We ought to temper our Commerce Clause jurisprudence.” Thomas wrote in United States v. Lopez (1995), “Although I might be willing to return to the original understanding, I recognize that many believe that it is too late in the day to undertake a fundamental reexamination of the past 60 years.”

“To put it bluntly, Justice Thomas really, really hates the Commerce Clause,” wrote law professor James M. McGoldrick in a 2019 Loyola Law Review article. The overturning of Roe v. Wade should be a lesson we learn from–that legal foundations and stare decisis are often shakier than we might care to admit. What’s scarier is that today, Thomas is joined by a Supreme Court disdainful of the administrative state.

First and foremost, incidents of child labor are on the rise. The Department of Labor reported that violations in 2023 reached their highest level in nearly two decades—quadrupling since 2015. These aren’t isolated incidents. They reflect a dangerous shift: state legislators across the country are rolling back child labor protections, while conservatives at the federal level push to dismantle regulatory safeguards under the guise of family rights, constitutional originalism, and corporate lobbying.

This movement is bolstered by a Supreme Court willing to reverse precedent, deconstruct the administrative state, and reinterpret foundational legal doctrines—especially the Commerce Clause, which underpins key child labor protections in the Fair Labor Standards Act. With these legal and political tides turning, caution is not just wise—it is necessary.

But amid this conservative campaign, there is an opportunity. The long-dormant Child Labor Amendment—passed by Congress a century ago but never fully ratified—remains viable. It lacks a deadline and needs just 10 more states for ratification. In a moment where protections are under siege, revisiting and ratifying the amendment is not only proactive, but essential. It would be a bold, constitutional commitment to safeguarding our children and defending our democracy from regressive forces.

The Need for an Amendment

Conservative forces are working to erode child labor protections, through the courts and state legislatures. The warning signs can't be ignored with a Supreme Court that has shown disregard for precedent.

Get in touch

We're building a movement to institute real constitutional change. Get in touch.

Iskander Khan is a junior at Cornell University.