Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
8. That 1908 decision does not reflect the current state of the law.
Mon Nov 3, 2014, 04:28 AM
Nov 2014

See, for example, Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190 (1976), in which the Court invalidated an Oklahoma statute that set different minimum ages for purchasing 3.2% beer (females 18 years old, males 21 years old). I'm sure that, if Muller arose today, the sex discrimination in minimum wages and maximum hours would be overturned.

Neither of these cases is directly applicable to the UPS appeal, however. The obvious problem here is that, while a state can have gender-neutral .wage-and-hour laws and gender-neutral alcohol laws, it cannot, in any meaningful sense, have gender-neutral laws about pregnancy.

I think the issue of accommodating pregnant workers has come up before, but I haven't researched it.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»SCOTUS to decide if pregn...»Reply #8