Muller v. Oregon
E726372
Muller v. Oregon is a landmark 1908 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld limits on women’s working hours, notable for its pioneering use of sociological and empirical data in legal argumentation.
All labels observed (3)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Muller v. Oregon canonical | 2 |
| Muller v. Oregon, 208 U.S. 412 (1908) | 1 |
| Opinion in Muller v. Oregon | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T8276176 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Muller v. Oregon Context triple: [Muller v. Oregon brief, relatedCase, Muller v. Oregon]
-
A.
Muller v. Oregon brief
The Muller v. Oregon brief is a landmark 1908 legal document, authored by Louis D. Brandeis, that pioneered the use of extensive social science data to defend labor regulations, particularly limiting women’s working hours.
-
B.
De Jonge v. Oregon
De Jonge v. Oregon is a 1937 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the right to peaceful assembly is a fundamental liberty protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and thus applies to the states.
-
C.
Lochner v. New York
Lochner v. New York is a landmark 1905 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down a state labor regulation and became emblematic of the era in which the Court used substantive due process to protect economic liberty and limit government regulation of business.
-
D.
Brandenburg v. Ohio
Brandenburg v. Ohio is a 1969 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly strengthened free speech protections by establishing the "imminent lawless action" test for when advocacy of violence can be punished under the First Amendment.
-
E.
Olmstead v. United States
Olmstead v. United States was a 1928 U.S. Supreme Court case that held warrantless wiretapping did not violate the Fourth Amendment, a stance later curtailed by modern privacy jurisprudence.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Muller v. Oregon Target entity description: Muller v. Oregon is a landmark 1908 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld limits on women’s working hours, notable for its pioneering use of sociological and empirical data in legal argumentation.
-
A.
Muller v. Oregon brief
The Muller v. Oregon brief is a landmark 1908 legal document, authored by Louis D. Brandeis, that pioneered the use of extensive social science data to defend labor regulations, particularly limiting women’s working hours.
-
B.
De Jonge v. Oregon
De Jonge v. Oregon is a 1937 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the right to peaceful assembly is a fundamental liberty protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and thus applies to the states.
-
C.
Lochner v. New York
Lochner v. New York is a landmark 1905 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down a state labor regulation and became emblematic of the era in which the Court used substantive due process to protect economic liberty and limit government regulation of business.
-
D.
Brandenburg v. Ohio
Brandenburg v. Ohio is a 1969 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly strengthened free speech protections by establishing the "imminent lawless action" test for when advocacy of violence can be punished under the First Amendment.
-
E.
Olmstead v. United States
Olmstead v. United States was a 1928 U.S. Supreme Court case that held warrantless wiretapping did not violate the Fourth Amendment, a stance later curtailed by modern privacy jurisprudence.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (51)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
constitutional law case ⓘ labor law case ⓘ landmark decision ⓘ |
| affectsArea |
constitutional law doctrine
ⓘ
labor regulation ⓘ women’s rights ⓘ |
| affectsGroup | women workers ⓘ |
| briefPreparedBy |
Josephine Clara Goldmark
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Louis D. Brandeis NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| briefSupportedBy | National Consumers League NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| decisionType | unanimous decision ⓘ |
| distinguishedFrom | Lochner v. New York NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| fullCaseName | Curt Muller v. State of Oregon NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasBrief | Brandeis Brief NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasCitation | 208 U.S. 412 ⓘ |
| hasCourt | Supreme Court of the United States NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasDecisionDate | 1908-02-24 ⓘ |
| hasJurisdiction | United States NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasLongTermImpact |
development of sociological jurisprudence
ⓘ
justification of sex-based protective labor laws ⓘ precedent for later gender discrimination cases ⓘ |
| hasStateContext | Oregon NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasYear | 1908 ⓘ |
| historicalContext | Progressive Era labor reform ⓘ |
| holding |
Oregon law limiting women’s working hours is constitutional
ⓘ
state may restrict women’s working hours without violating the Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ |
| introducedInnovation | systematic use of social science data in Supreme Court advocacy ⓘ |
| involvesConcept |
gender-based labor regulation
ⓘ
liberty of contract ⓘ police power ⓘ protective labor legislation ⓘ |
| involvesConstitutionalProvision | Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| involvesParty |
Curt Muller
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
State of Oregon NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| isKnownFor |
the Brandeis Brief
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
upholding limits on women’s working hours ⓘ use of sociological and empirical data in legal argument ⓘ |
| laterCriticizedFor |
entrenching gender inequality in labor law
ⓘ
paternalistic assumptions about women ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
constitutionality of maximum working hours law for women
ⓘ
police power of the state to regulate labor conditions ⓘ scope of liberty of contract under the Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ |
| opinionAuthor | Justice David J. Brewer NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| reasoningIncludes |
role of women as mothers
ⓘ
state interest in protecting women’s health ⓘ women’s physical differences from men ⓘ |
| relatedToCase | Lochner v. New York NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| subjectMatter |
maximum hours laws
ⓘ
women’s employment in industrial workplaces ⓘ |
| upheldStatute | Oregon law limiting women’s work in certain establishments to ten hours a day ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Muller v. Oregon Description of subject: Muller v. Oregon is a landmark 1908 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld limits on women’s working hours, notable for its pioneering use of sociological and empirical data in legal argumentation.
Referenced by (4)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
this entity surface form:
Muller v. Oregon, 208 U.S. 412 (1908)
this entity surface form:
Opinion in Muller v. Oregon