What was the main argument of each side in Muller v Oregon?
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 Supreme Court decide in Muller v Oregon quizlet?
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.
Was Muller v Oregon good or bad?
State of Oregon, U.S. Supreme Court case decided in 1908 that, although it appeared to promote the health and welfare of female workers, in fact led to additional protective legislation that was detrimental to equality in the workplace for years to come.
What happened in the Muller v Oregon case?
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.
Who won in Muller vs Oregon?
majority opinion by David J. Brewer. The Court unanimously upheld the Oregon regulation. The Court distinguished Lochner v.
Why did Kurt Muller claim the Oregon labor law was unconstitutional?
Muller claimed that the charges violated his right to freely contract under the US Constitution. With a 9-0 vote, the Supreme Court decided that the law passed by the state of Oregon was in fact constitutional.
When was Muller v Oregon overturned?
1923
What evidence convinced the Supreme Court to affirm the decision of the Oregon Supreme Court?
In 1903, Oregon passed a law that said that women could work no more than 10 hours a day in factories and laundries. A woman at Muller’s laundry was required to work more than 10 hours. Muller was convicted of violating the law. His appeal eventually was heard to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Why was Muller v Oregon so important?
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.
Do you agree with the Supreme Court’s decision in Muller give reasons for your answer?
Do you agree with the Supreme Court’s decision in Muller? Give reasons for your answer? Yes, Muller broke the law that was in place. Why was the Espionage Act passed?
Who was president during Muller v Oregon?
(1837-1910): Brewer, an associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court (1889-1910), was appointed to the High Court bench by President Benjamin Harrison. He delivered the unanimous opinion in the Muller v. State of Oregon case.
How did the Brandeis brief affect the future of FBS in legal decision making?
The Brandeis brief changed the direction of the Supreme Court and of U.S. law. It is considered a model for future Supreme Court presentations in cases affecting the health or welfare of classes of individuals. This strategy of combining legal argument with scientific evidence was later successfully used in Brown v.
What is unique about a Brandeis brief?
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 is the name of the case where Justice Louis D Brandeis wrote a concurring opinion on the principles of judicial self restraint as they pertain to constitutional interpretation?
I will speak first, and longest, of the Brandeis Brief famously filed in Muller v. Oregon. The Supreme Court decided that case in 1908.
Which is an example of prior restraint?
The court of appeals said the injunction was a “classic example of a prior restraint”—the “most serious and least tolerable infringement on First Amendment rights.” It said such restraints “carry a heavy presumption of invalidity” and that the injunction at issue was overbroad, because it prohibited all public speech …
What happens when a judge practices judicial restraint?
Last, if a constitutional issue must be faced, a restrained judge will presume the constitutionality of government action and strike it down only if the constitutional violation is clear. Restrained judges are also less willing to overturn the precedents of prior judicial decisions.
Which entity can check the appointment power of the president?
The Courts and the Executive Branch The main check that the Executive Branch has on the federal courts is the power of appointment. Article II of the U.S. Constitution provides that federal judges are appointed by the President, with the “advice and consent” of the Senate.
Can the President appoint judges diplomats without Congress?
… and [the President] shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established …
What is an article 2 judge?
In the United States, the title of federal judge means a judge (pursuant to Article Three of the United States Constitution) nominated by the president of the United States and confirmed by the United States Senate pursuant to the Appointments Clause in Article II of the United States Constitution.
Can the president terminate a treaty?
Presently, there is no official Supreme Court ruling on whether the President has the power to break a treaty without the approval of Congress, and the courts also declined to interfere when President George W.
What is the meaning of pacta sunt servanda?
agreements must be kept
Do treaties expire?
Some treaties are intended by the parties to be only temporarily binding and are set to expire on a given date. Other treaties may self-terminate if the treaty is meant to exist only under certain conditions.
Did US declare war on Vietnam?
In United States v. Shultz, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court ruled on, and the U.S. Supreme Court was petitioned to reconsider, the constitutionality of then Treasury Secretary, George Schultz, allocating funds to the Vietnam War in spite of the fact that an official Declaration of War had never been made.
Which President declared war on Vietnam?
Military engagements authorized by Congress
| War or conflict | Opponent(s) | President |
|---|---|---|
| Vietnam War Laotian Civil War Cambodian Civil War | Mainland China National United Front of Kampuchea Khmer Rouge Khmer Rumdo Khmer Việt Minh North Korea North Vietnam Pathet Lao South Vietnam Việt Cộng | Lyndon B. Johnson |