The Muller Decision: Class Gender Progressivism
Student’s Name
University
Professor
Course
Date
The Muller Decision: Class Gender Progressivism
Did women’s progressive period in America limited to various social activities? During the late 1890s and early 1900, life in America shifted from rural to urban cities, with most of America living in the cities and working in the ranches and farms. The urban lifestyle increased, with most working in industrial setups. Shifting from a rural to an urban setup of America was seen to bring new changes in families and gender roles. The primary function of women brought with them new ways of living: to take care of homes, prepare meals, work inside the houses, and be tender to the children. However, due to the increased cost of living, women were forced to work in factories and farms with their husbands to provide for their families. This led to the rise of groups of reform-minded individuals who proposed new changes which condemned women from employment. Though women were denied the opportunity to engage in work, they played a very crucial part in supporting the families since their contributions based on their earnings were essential in keeping the family in order.
Evidence used by the State Attorney in Brandeis Brief in supporting the Limitation of Working hours for Women
According to the Supreme Court ruling on the number of hours women were supposed to work, the court argued that it had an interest in safeguarding women’s health, hence the few hours of work. The Supreme Court made this ruling following the fourteen Amendments, which did not restrict the supreme from reducing the working hours of employers (Chatfield, 2019). Oregon State, however, imposed new laws that prohibited businesses from exposing women to long working hours. Brandeis’s brief argued that women were physically and mentally weak and unable to fully concentrate on their work for quite a long working day. According to the Oregon Supreme Court, women needed special treatment and protection due to their particular position in the families as mothers and wives (Williams & MacLean, 2020). Regarding this, the court ruled in favor of Brandeis’s brief since it felt that women were supposed to fulfill their roles in the families as mothers and wives, and exposing them to long working hours could lead to the failure of their primary function.
The decision of Muller concerning Oregon State has resulted in significant changes today. The outcome of the case made workers to be protected from their employers by limiting the number of hours of work. However, as a result, this has made workers enjoy various forms of protection like minimum wages, enforced break time, and overtime which initially was not the case (Prifogle, 2020). Also, Muller’s decision showed the difference between men and women since women required protection from the state. The fact that women cannot choose their working conditions makes them face various workplace problems
.
The suggestion of the State Attorney about women and the role of government in protecting them
According to the Supreme Court ruling of 1908, the position of women in society was evident. The role played by women in the community was significant and influential at the same time, and its failure could lead to much damage in the family (Chatfield, 2019). Having multiple roles was not a sim easy task for women since they had to tender for their homes and work; this was seen to be dangerous for the total well-being of women. Notably, since society strongly felt that women were psychologically and emotionally weak, managing all tasks at hand was very difficult and exhausting. However, the justification of the supreme court by that time was seen to undermine the potential of women; looking at the matter from a deeper perspective, it is clear that the decision promoted the wealth and welfare of women while at the same time enhancing equality in the workplace. The working condition of women was improved, hence showing the government’s significant role in treating women with contentment in society. Understanding that women did not have anyone to speak out for them, the government taking that role in fighting for them ensured that the community treated each other with respect
.
The argument made by the Lawyers
Muller’s lawyers argued that, just like other citizens in America, women deserve the right and privileges, giving them enough room to make their bargain concerning working hours and work freely (Prifogle, 2020). The lawyers did not see the reasons for giving women the necessary treatment as they were the same as males in society are deserves equal treatment. The lawyers were keen since they did not want to sound like they were not protecting and caring for women’s rights. The lawyers ensured that their position on women’s privileges did not contradict the law’s expectations. As lawyers, they confirmed that they fully understood the law and the requirements since the constitution was the fundamental guideline of their argument. Arguing outside the law would have shown that they did not understand the law’s implications and requirements regarding such a case.
Muller’s Attorney’s argument
William Fenton was Muller’s Attorney for the appeal. In William’s argument regarding the case, he stated that women were equal to men and deserved equal opportunity and treatment as males. He felt that the Supreme Court was defending women, yet they were not inferior as they anticipated. He believed in women’s potential and mentioned that women’s capability was beyond understanding since they could do the same jobs as men and more effectively (Williams & MacLean, 2020). In his position on the case, he felt that limiting the working hours of women was unnecessary since it would hinder them from fully exploring their working potential.
In conclusion, the supreme decision based on limiting the working hours of women has brought numerous significant results in safeguarding workers from their employers. The impacts of the 1908 ruling are still felt and enjoyed in modern society. Gender balancing is crucial in building a stable community based on mutual engagement. Contemporary society needs to understand the importance of each community member so that joint development in the community can be fully exercised. The government and other bodies that safeguard human dignity should come out boldly to help fight discrimination based on gender differences. Teaching the mass about the importance of equal treatment in society should be encouraged since this will significantly assist in seeing the club live knowing the worth of each community member.
References
Chatfield, S. (2019). Competing Social Constructions of Women Workers in Lochner-Era Judicial Decision-Making. Const. Stud., 4, 105.
Prifogle, E. A. (2020). Law and Laundry: White laundresses, Chinese laundrymen, and the origins of Muller v. Oregon. In Studies in Law, Politics, and Society. Emerald Publishing Limited.
Williams, J. E., & MacLean, V. M. (2020). In Pursuit of Justice: The Scholar-Activism of Feminist Settlement Workers in the Progressive Era (1890-1920s). Sociology Between the Gaps: Forgotten and Neglected Topics, 5(1), 3.