Cornell Law Review Volume 26 Article 9 Issue 2 February 1941 Notes and Comments Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Notes and Comments, 26 Cornell L. Rev. 298 (1941) Available at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol26/iss2/9 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cornell Law Review by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. For more information, please contact
[email protected]. NOTES AND COMMENTS Administrative Law: Walsh-Healey Act: Right to bid on .federal con- tracts: Judicial control of administrative action.-Disturbed1 because the Government had been abetting sweatshop and substandard labor condi-2 tions by awarding contracts for supplies to the lowest responsible bidder, Congress on June 30, 1936, passed the Walsh-Healey Act.3 It empowers the Secretary of Labor, guided by findings and recommendations made after investigation by the Public Contracts Board, to include a stipulation in sup- ply contracts that the contractor pay not less than a fixed minimum wage. The standard to which the Secretary must adhere in fixing the wage level is "the prevailing minimum wages . in the locality" where the supplies are manufactured or furnished.4 Whether a prospective bidder can successfully challenge in the courts the Secretary's wage determinations -under the Act came before the Supreme Court for the first time in Perkins et al. v. Lukens Steel Company et al., 60 Sup.