Talk:Bradwell v. Illinois

	This article is part of WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, a collaborative effort to improve articles related to Supreme Court cases and the Supreme Court. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.U.S. Supreme Court casesWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesTemplate:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesU.S. Supreme Court articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Law

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Women's History Mid‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled[edit]

might be worth adding that slaughterhouse cases were decided by a much closer majority... It's potentially interesting that several of the justices arguing that 14th amendment applied to the butchers felt that it definitely didn't apply to women. Mjforbes666 (talk) 15:08, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to take the exclamation mark off the end of one of the paragraphs, but when I previewed it I saw a picture of a...mouth...a big...picture...of a mouth...

...I've decided to let the powers that be deal with that. 76.211.213.194 (talk) 23:21, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the article, the word 'regulable' is used, but is not actually a word. any idea what the original writer meant to say? "...Fourteenth Amendment did not include the right to practice a profession, so it was properly *REGULABLE* by the states." ??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.67.194.217 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'Regulable' is a word. It's legal-speak which means that the Constitution allows Congress to enact a certain kind of regulation or legislation in a particular way. In this context, the author meant that because the 14th Amendment, according to the Court at that time, did not recognize a right to practice a profession, states could allow some people to practice a profession and bar others from doing so, i.e. states could regulate in this area.

This decision came down in December 1, 1872, not in 1873. This should be corrected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.124.128.226 (talk) 16:31, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]