Talk:Brandeis brief

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Law Start‑class

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Untitled edit

What Adobe Acrobat file? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sauntering (talk • contribs) 17:33, 5 April 2006

Wording needs refinement edit

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I really don't like the phrasing "that their bodies were communal property that required legal protections against overwork." It's a very rough reading of the case, and "communal property" is an awkward way to phrase the legal principle that laws should protect female workers because of their roles as childbearers. Anyone got a better phrasing? ---Shane Landrum (cliotropic) 04:07, 26 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Generalized usage? edit

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This Washington Post article seems to suggest "Brandeis brief" is a general phrase applicable to any similar brief. I almost went and added it in to the article, but since the current sourcing is to more scholarly references, I thought I'd defer to someone with more knowledge in law. --BDD (talk) 18:00, 8 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Add topic