Which Supreme Court case upheld an Oregon law limiting the hours worked by women in 1908?

Study for the Advanced Placement United States History (APUSH) Test. Access flashcards, multiple choice questions, detailed explanations, and essential test preparation resources to excel in the Progressive Era segment.

Multiple Choice

Which Supreme Court case upheld an Oregon law limiting the hours worked by women in 1908?

Explanation:
Protective labor regulation for women during the Progressive Era is the central idea here. In Muller v. Oregon, the Court upheld an Oregon law that restricted women to ten hours of work per day, grounding the decision in the belief that women have distinct physical needs and are more vulnerable to long hours. The ruling is notable for its use of sociological data presented in the Brandeis Brief, which helped justify state intervention to protect women’s health and family responsibilities. It stands in contrast to Lochner v. New York, where the Court struck down a similar hours limitation on the basis of a broad freedom of contract, showing the era's ongoing debate over how far the state could go to regulate labor. Together, these cases illustrate how Progressive Era reform rhetoric sometimes produced protective laws that the Court would accept, at least in specific contexts.

Protective labor regulation for women during the Progressive Era is the central idea here. In Muller v. Oregon, the Court upheld an Oregon law that restricted women to ten hours of work per day, grounding the decision in the belief that women have distinct physical needs and are more vulnerable to long hours. The ruling is notable for its use of sociological data presented in the Brandeis Brief, which helped justify state intervention to protect women’s health and family responsibilities. It stands in contrast to Lochner v. New York, where the Court struck down a similar hours limitation on the basis of a broad freedom of contract, showing the era's ongoing debate over how far the state could go to regulate labor. Together, these cases illustrate how Progressive Era reform rhetoric sometimes produced protective laws that the Court would accept, at least in specific contexts.

Subscribe

Get the latest from Examzify

You can unsubscribe at any time. Read our privacy policy