Muller, Plaintiff in Error, v. the State of Oregon

Opinion summary

Etalia.ai summary of the majority opinion

In the 1907 U.S. Supreme Court case Muller v. State of Oregon, Curt Muller, the owner of a laundry business, was convicted for violating an Oregon law that limited women to ten hours of work in factories and laundries. He appealed his conviction arguing that it violated "liberty to contract" under the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause. However, the Supreme Court upheld his conviction and ruled in favor of Oregon state by a unanimous decision (9-0). The court held that states have inherent police power to protect public health and welfare which includes limiting working hours for women due to their physical structure and societal role as mothers. This ruling marked one of the first times when sociological data was used in legal argumentation - known as Brandeis Brief - setting precedent for future cases involving gender-based labor laws.

Dissent summary

Etalia.ai summary of the dissenting opinions

In the dissenting opinion for Muller v. The State of Oregon, Justice Brewer did not provide a written dissent. However, it's important to note that this case was significant as it upheld an Oregon law limiting women’s work hours based on the belief that women needed special protection due to their physical structure and societal role as mothers. This ruling reflected prevailing gender norms at the time which saw women as weaker than men and primarily responsible for child-rearing. Despite its discriminatory nature by today's standards, this decision was seen progressive in 1907 because it acknowledged a need for laws protecting workers from exploitation by employers.