MULLER v. OREGON

Print this Page
Case Basics
Docket No. 
107
Petitioner 
Muller
Respondent 
Oregon
Term:
Location: Grand Laundry
Facts of the Case 

Oregon enacted a law that limited women to ten hours of work in factories and laundries.

Question 

Does the Oregon law violate a woman's freedom of contract implicit in the liberty protected by due process of the Fourteenth Amendment?

Conclusion 

There was no constitutional violation. The factory and laundry owners claimed that there was no reasonable connection between the law and public health, safety, or welfare. In a famous brief in defense of the Oregon law, attorney Louis Brandeis elaborately detailed expert reports on the harmful physical, economic and social effects of long working hours on women. Brewer's opinion was based on the proposition that physical and social differences between the sexes warranted a different rule respecting labor contracts. Theretofore, gender was not a basis for such distinctions. Brewer's opinion conveyed the accepted wisdom of the day: that women were unequal and inferior to men.

Cite this Page
MULLER v. OREGON. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 25 November 2014. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1901-1939/1907/1907_107>.
MULLER v. OREGON, The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, http://www.oyez.org/cases/1901-1939/1907/1907_107 (last visited November 25, 2014).
"MULLER v. OREGON," The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, accessed November 25, 2014, http://www.oyez.org/cases/1901-1939/1907/1907_107.