Roschen v. Ward

Background

Dealers who sell eyeglasses in New York challenged a 1928 state law that makes it unlawful to sell spectacles at retail in a store unless a licensed physician or a certified optometrist is in charge and in personal attendance at the place of sale. The dealers sell ordinary magnifying spectacles, let customers choose without an eye exam, and said hiring an optometrist would ruin their business. A three-judge federal court refused a preliminary injunction and dismissed the complaints, finding no cause of action.

Reasoning

The main question was whether the statute was an improper attempt to forbid ordinary sales or whether it simply required professional oversight. Justice Holmes wrote that the language means the physician or optometrist must be in charge by reason of professional capacity and must decide when an eye examination is needed. The Court rejected the claim that the law must require an exam in every case. It said courts should use common sense to read the statute and leave policy tradeoffs to the legislature.

Real world impact

The ruling leaves the state law in force, so retail eyeglass sellers may need a licensed eye professional present and supervising sales. That will likely increase the number of eye checks and make it harder to sell low-cost, self-selected reading glasses without professional oversight. The Court emphasized that even if the law does not solve every problem, its supervision can reduce harm and the decision whether to require more rests with lawmakers, not judges.