What did the Supreme Court decide in Muller v Oregon?
Muller v. Oregon, one of the most important U.S. Supreme Court cases of the Progressive Era, upheld an Oregon law limiting the workday for female wage earners to ten hours. The case established a precedent in 1908 to expand the reach of state activity into the realm of protective labor legislation.
What was the issue in Muller v Muller?
Muller v. State of Oregon. At issue was an Oregon law passed in 1903 that prohibited women from working more than 10 hours in one day. Curt Muller, a laundry owner, was charged in 1905 with permitting a supervisor to require Mrs. E. Gotcher to work more than 10 hours and was fined $10.
What did David Brewer do in Muller v Oregon?
David J. Brewer. …wrote the majority opinion in Muller v. Oregon (1908), sustaining a state law that limited to 10 the daily working hours of women factory employees. From 1895 to 1897 he served as president of the commission appointed by Congress to investigate the boundary dispute between Venezuela and British Guiana.….
What happened to Curt Muller?
Curt Muller, the owner of a laundry business, was convicted of violating Oregon labor laws by making a female employee work more than ten hours in a single day. Muller was fined $10.
What happened Muller vs Oregon?
Muller v. Oregon, one of the most important U.S. Supreme Court cases of the Progressive Era, upheld an Oregon law limiting the workday for female wage earners to ten hours. The case established a precedent in 1908 to expand the reach of state activity into the realm of protective labor legislation.
Why did the Muller v. Oregon case cause controversy?
In Muller vs. Oregon, a laundry owner argued that limiting women to a ten-hour work day was an unconstitutional violation of their right to choose their own employment. Due in large part to a unique legal brief by Louis Brandeis, the Supreme Court concluded that the states could limit the working hours of women.
What did the 1903 Muller vs Oregon decision upheld?
In Muller v. Oregon, the Supreme Court upheld the state's labor law on maximum hours of work allowed. Muller owned a laundromat in which his female workers were working more than 10 hours a day. The court ruled that Oregon's labor law was constitutional as it identified it as a protective measure for its women.
Why did Muller believe the Oregon law was unconstitutional?
Referring to the Fourteenth Amendment, Muller argued the Oregon law was unconstitutional since "the statute [law} does not apply equally to all persons . . . " Brandeis, using the lengthy brief, countered that women as a group needed special protection.
What did the supreme court decide in Muller v. Oregon quizlet?
Terms in this set (4) A supreme court case decided in 1908 that pertained to the working hours of women. The court ruled in favor of Oregon, that these restrictions were legal under the state laws to protect women's health.
Who argued Muller v. Oregon?
Brandeis, argued the case in the U.S. Supreme Court. Goldmark and Brandeis's innovation would come to be known as a "Brandeis Brief," and many others would later be modeled on it." Goldmark and her team were able to assemble 98 out of the 118 pages of the brief, meaning much of the credit for the brief goes to her.
In what way did the court ruling in Muller v. Oregon contradict the ideas behind the womens rights movement?
In what way did the court ruling Muller vs. Oregon contradict the ideas behind the women's rights movement? This ruling stated that it was legal to consider women separate class from men. and so it was fair to limit their work hours.
When was Muller vs Oregon?
1908Muller v. Oregon / Date decided
What was the decision in the 1917 case of Bunting v Oregon?
Bunting v. Oregon, 243 U.S. 426 (1917), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States upheld a ten-hour work day, which was accepted for both men and women, but the state minimum-wage laws were not changed until 20 years later.
What did the law call for in Adkins?
In Adkins v. Children's Hospital (1923), the Supreme Court ruled that a minimum wage law for women violated the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment because it abridged a citizen's right to freely contract labor.
What was the judgment in Lochner v New York?
5–4 decision for Lochner The Court invalidated the New York law. The majority maintained that the statute interfered with the freedom of contract, and thus the Fourteenth Amendment's right to liberty afforded to employer and employee.
What did the Brandeis brief do?
The brief was significant in that it was the first one submitted to the Supreme Court that relied primarily on extra-legal data to prove its argument. Not only did the brief help Brandeis win the case but it also became a legal landmark in its own right.
What did Louis D Brandeis argue in Muller v. Oregon?
However, the attorney for the state, Louis D. Brandeis, chose to argue on the grounds that women needed “special protection” by virtue of their physical differences from men.
What was the decision in the 1917 case of Bunting v Oregon?
Bunting v. Oregon, 243 U.S. 426 (1917), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States upheld a ten-hour work day, which was accepted for both men and women, but the state minimum-wage laws were not changed until 20 years later.
In which decision did the Supreme Court rule that separate but equal facilities were constitutional?
“Separate but equal” refers to the infamously racist decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) that allowed the use of segregation laws by states and local governments.
When was Muller vs Oregon?
1908Muller v. Oregon / Date decided
What was the significance of Muller v. Oregon?
Oregon, 208 U.S. 412 (1908), was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court. Women were provided by state mandate lesser work-hours than allotted to men. The posed question was whether women's liberty to negotiate a contract with an employer should be equal to a man's.
How much was Muller fined?
Muller was fined $10. Muller appealed to the Oregon Supreme Court and then to the U.S. Supreme Court, both of which upheld the constitutionality of the labor law and affirmed his conviction.
Which amendment was the Oregon limit on working hours?
Holding. Oregon's limit on the working hours of women was constitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment , as it was justified by the strong state interest in protecting women's health. Supreme Court of Oregon affirmed. Court membership. Chief Justice.
Who argued the Goldmark case?
Her brother-in-law, the future Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis, argued the case in the U.S. Supreme Court. Goldmark and Brandeis's innovation would come to be known as a " Brandeis Brief ," and many others would later be modeled on it.".
Is the Oregon maximum hours law unconstitutional?
The State of Oregon. Appellant's claim: Oregon's 1903 maximum hours law is unconstitutional. Oregon's limit on the working hours of women was constitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment, as it was justified by the strong state interest in protecting women's health. Supreme Court of Oregon affirmed.
What was the case of Muller v. Oregon?
Oregon, Supreme Court of the United States, (1908) Case summary for Muller v. Oregon: An Oregon state law restricted a women’s working hours to ten per day. After being convicted of requiring a woman to violate the statute, Muller, a laundry business owner, challenged the constitutionality of the statute. The state courts continued to find ...
Why did the Supreme Court uphold the Muller v. Oregon case?
The Court upheld the lower court’s decision because women are uniquely qualified to fulfill these roles, and it was established that the natural order of society was for women to depend on men to work the long hours. Muller v. Oregon Case Brief.
Who did Muller appeal to?
In response, Muller appealed to the state supreme court. After they found for the state, Muller appealed to the United States Supreme Court, who granted certiorari.
What was the law in Oregon that allowed women to work more than 10 hours a day?
Statement of the facts: Oregon’s legislature passed a law which limited the working hours of female employees. Under the law passed in 1903, a woman could not work more than ten hours a day. Mr. Curt Muller was convicted of violating the statute when he required a woman to work over the limit at his laundry facility.
What was the significance of Muller v. Oregon?
Muller v. Oregon, one of the most important U.S. Supreme Court cases of the Progressive Era , upheld an Oregon law limiting the workday for female wage earners to ten hours. The case established a precedent in 1908 to expand the reach of state activity into the realm of protective labor legislation.
Who was the attorney for the case of Muller v. State?
Supreme Court. Muller’s attorney for the appeal was William Fenton, an opponent of state intervention in the economy.
What did Florence Kelley believe about the Lochner case?
Yet, many advocates of reform, like Florence Kelley of the National Consumers' Union, believed that the protection of women would open the door for greater state protections of workers. She sought a means to get around Supreme Court decisions that had closed down the ungendered path. Most notably, in the Lochner decision of 1905, the Court had ruled unconstitutional a New York law that had limited the hours of employment bakeries could impose on their workers, all of whom were male, on the grounds that it was an unhealthful profession. Kelley sought out attorney Louis Brandeis to write the defense brief in the Muller case. His use of social scientific research to argue that women were adversely affected by long hours of labor was an attempt to get around the Lochner decision.
What was the Lochner decision?
Most notably, in the Lochner decision of 1905, the Court had ruled unconstitutional a New York law that had limited the hours of employment bakeries could impose on their workers, all of whom were male, on the grounds that it was an unhealthful profession.
Who wrote the defense brief in the Muller case?
Kelley sought out attorney Louis Brandeis to write the defense brief in the Muller case. His use of social scientific research to argue that women were adversely affected by long hours of labor was an attempt to get around the Lochner decision.
Who said the state has no right to lay any disability upon women?
While the argument aimed to prevent the state from gaining any right to regulate economic activity, it also expressed the sentiment of many feminists of the era, including Clara Colby , the editor of the Portland -based Woman’s Tribune: “The state has no right to lay any disability upon woman as an individual.”.
How would Brandeis's theory affect future mothers?
Brandeis argued that future mothers would be harmed by overwork in factories, reducing their capacity for childbearing and resulting in weakened children. Further, families would be harmed by the loss of female service in the home.
What was the Muller vs Oregon case?
The case of Muller vs. Oregon was a landmark court case that took place in 1908. The major issue of the court case was an Oregon law passed in 1903 that set a maximum of ten hours a day for women employed in factories and laundries. The law fell in a category of “progressive” laws being passed during the time period in order to protect workers during a period of rapid industrialization. The right of a State to regulate the working hours of women rests on the police power and the right to preserve the health of the women of the State, and is not affected by other laws of the State granting or denying to women the same rights as to contract and the elective franchise as are enjoyed by men. The state of Oregon enacted this law restricting the length of women’s work days in order to protect their health and safety seeing as that women are the childbearing gender and their wellbeing is imperative. (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0208_0412_ZS.html)
What was the significance of the Muller vs Oregon case?
The major issue of the court case was an Oregon law passed in 1903 that set a maximum of ten hours a day for women employed in factories and laundries. The law fell in a category of “progressive” laws being passed during the time period in order to protect workers during a period of rapid industrialization.
Who was Curt Muller?
Curt Muller, the owner of a laundry business, was convicted of violating Oregon labor laws by making a female employee work more than ten hours in a single day. Muller was fined $10. Muller appealed to the Oregon Supreme Court and then to the U.S. Supreme Court, both of which upheld the constitutionality of the labor law and affirmed his conviction. Oregon’s attorney general agreed that Louis D. Brandeis should defend the law before the Court. Brandeis was a lawyer who supported reforms that protected workers. He filed a brief argument in the case that discussed previous legal cases for only two pages. Brandeis then presented much evidence showing a direct link between long hours of work and women’s health.
Was Muller vs Oregon overturned?
The ruling in Muller vs. Oregon has not been overturned by the Supreme Court. It has remained constitutional for state law to mandate the amount of hours women can spend in the workplace, in order to protect them physically. Some argue that it was a victory for progressive reformers during a period of increased industrialization and an important step in labor reform, while others argue that it violated women’s 14th amendment rights and stripped them of their freedom to negotiate terms with their employer. Regardless of what the case is viewed as, a victory or a setback, it will live in history as one of the most influential cases determined by the Supreme Court to date. It truly is a landmark event in American history.
Overview
Muller v. Oregon, 208 U.S. 412 (1908), was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court. Women were provided by state mandate lesser work-hours than allotted to men. The posed question was whether women's liberty to negotiate a contract with an employer should be equal to a man's. The law did not recognize sex-based discrimination in 1908; it was unrecognized until the case of Reed v. Reed in 1971; here, the test was not under the equal prote…
Background
Curt Muller, the owner of a laundry business, was convicted of violating Oregon labor laws by making a female employee work more than ten hours in a single day. Muller was fined $10. Muller appealed to the Oregon Supreme Court and then to the U.S. Supreme Court, both of which upheld the constitutionality of the labor law and affirmed his conviction.
Louis Brandeis, the young attorney who used social science to argue that women workers need…
Judgment
In Justice David Josiah Brewer's unanimous opinion, the Court upheld the Oregon regulation. The Court did not overrule Lochner, but instead distinguished it on the basis of "the difference between the sexes". The child-bearing physiology and social role of women provided a strong state interest in reducing their working hours.
That woman's physical structure and the performance of maternal functions place her at a disad…
Significance of the case
Groups like the National Consumer League (which included Florence Kelley and Josephine Goldmark as feminists) and the state won shorter hours for women. However, many equal-rights feminists opposed the ruling, since it allowed laws based on stereotyped gender roles that restricted women's rights and financial Independence. While it provided protection from long hours to white women, it did not extend to women of color, food processors, agricultural workers, and …
See also
• Bunting v. Oregon
• List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 208
• Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905)
• Adkins v. Children's Hospital, 261 U.S. 525 (1923)
Further reading
• Becker, Mary E. (1986). "From Muller v. Oregon to Fetal Vulnerability Policies". University of Chicago Law Review. 53 (4): 1219–1273. doi:10.2307/1599748. JSTOR 1599748.
• Bernstein, David E. (2011). Rehabilitating Lochner: Defending Individual Rights against Progressive Reform. Chapter 4. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-04353-3
External links
• Works related to Muller v. Oregon at Wikisource
• Text of Muller v. Oregon, 208 U.S. 412 (1908) is available from: Cornell CourtListener Findlaw Google Scholar Justia Library of Congress Oyez (oral argument audio) This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
• Women Working (1800-1930)