Muller v Oregon
In the early 20th century, women in Oregon were restricted to 10-hour workdays. Curt Muller, a business owner, was fined and convicted of letting one of his female employees exceed the daily working limit. He was fined, appealed to the state supreme court, and lost. The famous Brandeis Brief, in favor of Oregon, introduced numerous social science studies and statistical evidence in the context of the Progressive Era (political reform period). However, Muller brought into question whether it was wrong for women to have shorter working hours. His argument utilized Lochner v New York and the liberty of contract that it provided.
Breakdown Verdict.
The Supreme Court unanimously favored Oregon and reinforced the working conditions. Justice Brewer wrote the opinion, stating “as healthy mothers are essential to vigorous offspring, the physical well-being of women becomes an object of public interest and care in order to preserve the strength and vigor of the race.” The Court reasoned that women’s physical differences and maternal role justified protective labor legislation.
Result Going Forward.
Muller v Oregon reinforced different labor standards for men and women, primarily led by the Brandeis Brief. It toes the line between progression that empowers women and traditional views that keep them in a maternal role. The decision later influenced debates over gender-based labor protections. Although Adkins v. Children’s Hospital (1923) rejected some of its reasoning, Muller remained an important precedent in discussions about protective labor legislation for women.
Do you agree with the verdict?
100%
0%