The Repercussions Of Muller V. Oregon
Jekyll and Hyde
The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold Muller v Oregon is the judicial equivalent of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde; with one notable exception; Robert Louis Stevenson’s story is fiction; the Court’s version is real and still scaring people today. The repercussions of the Muller v Oregon decision are factual, and the effects of the ruling, seemingly, have a life of their own. It is astonishing that a challenge to the Oregon law and refusal to pay a $10 misdemeanor fine has had the long-ranging and far-reaching effect on the Federal judicial process, but it has. In fact, that 1908 decision still impacts the lives of many American citizens today.
First of all, in 1903, Oregon passed a law that restricted women working in factories and laundries for more than ten hours in a single day. In 1905, Curt Muller, the owner of a laundry, was convicted of requiring a woman to work more than ten hours in one day and was fined $10. He appealed his conviction all the way through the Oregon courts and even to the United States Supreme Court, losing at each level. (Wolloch 1996) The Supreme Court based their ruling mainly on the arguments of Justice Louis Brandeis, who based his defense on the law almost entirely on women’s health issues. However, the Court’s decision, …show more content…
This well-intentioned law only addressed one segment of the working population: women, and not even addressing the entire segment but merely protecting factory and laundry-working women. Arguments for the law focused on the need to protect workers, albeit some workers, by opening the door for future, more far-reaching protective laws. On the other hand, this very same law created sex-discrimination; treating women as a separate class of workers than
The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold Muller v Oregon is the judicial equivalent of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde; with one notable exception; Robert Louis Stevenson’s story is fiction; the Court’s version is real and still scaring people today. The repercussions of the Muller v Oregon decision are factual, and the effects of the ruling, seemingly, have a life of their own. It is astonishing that a challenge to the Oregon law and refusal to pay a $10 misdemeanor fine has had the long-ranging and far-reaching effect on the Federal judicial process, but it has. In fact, that 1908 decision still impacts the lives of many American citizens today.
First of all, in 1903, Oregon passed a law that restricted women working in factories and laundries for more than ten hours in a single day. In 1905, Curt Muller, the owner of a laundry, was convicted of requiring a woman to work more than ten hours in one day and was fined $10. He appealed his conviction all the way through the Oregon courts and even to the United States Supreme Court, losing at each level. (Wolloch 1996) The Supreme Court based their ruling mainly on the arguments of Justice Louis Brandeis, who based his defense on the law almost entirely on women’s health issues. However, the Court’s decision, …show more content…
This well-intentioned law only addressed one segment of the working population: women, and not even addressing the entire segment but merely protecting factory and laundry-working women. Arguments for the law focused on the need to protect workers, albeit some workers, by opening the door for future, more far-reaching protective laws. On the other hand, this very same law created sex-discrimination; treating women as a separate class of workers than