Abstract
Constitutional review of economic and social legislation requires especially convincing reasoning, and this need represents a demanding challenge for the judiciary. This paper suggests that the risks connected to such review can be spotted when it comes to the Czech constitutional court's ruling on database regarding retail sales (the "EET" system) and on smoking ban in restaurants.
More specifically, this paper argues that the expansive scope of review, proposed by dissents to both decisions, could be considerably damaging to the court itself. The damage could parallel the harm suffered by the US Supreme Court when it tried to apply similar approach during the Lochner era, leading to the significant demise of the federal judiciary after 1937.