Answer the prompt: construct a response for the corresponding question below. 8 sentence (it can be longer, but not shorter); 2) use direct primary source quotes;

• According to your source, is a state law limiting female ownership and where they can work constitutional? Why or why not?
• How might ideas of female difference influence the arguments being made?'

Sources

https://youtu.be/sx7RJ7-ogPI?si=BQDb9XflwXEzvMa8

https://youtu.be/AWeZ5SKXvj8?si=x7HA9gX9dyP_ievQ

The Plaintiffs. According to Michigan law, Valentine Goesaert and Margaret Goesaert were not allowed to be the owner of a bar in a city larger than 50,000. Their attorney, Anne R. Davidow, wrote the following on their behalf.

Plaintiffs [Valentine and Margaret Goesaert] further say that said Act is discriminatory and unreasonable, and if defendants are permitted to carry the said Act into effect, plaintiffs will suffer great and irreparable injury; and that they will be deprived of their property without due process of law, in that they will be deprived of their means of livelihood, if the defendants enforce said Act, as they have threatened to do; and that the threatened action on the part of defendants will cause additional damage to plaintiff Valentine Goesaert in that she will be compelled either to close her place or business or hire male bartenders, and she will lose the investment of years of work and savings...

Plaintiffs further say that the Act is in violation of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United Sates, for the following reasons:

• It denies the plaintiffs the equal protection of the laws, and if enforced by defendants, will deprive plaintiffs of their property without due process of law, because it sets up an arbitrary standard of 50,000 as the population of any community to come under the Act
• It discriminates against women owners
• It discriminates against women bartenders
• It discriminates between daughters of male and female owners
• It discriminates between waitresses and female bartenders
• Because the discrimination is arbitrary and unreasonable, in view of the fact that the Provisions of the Liquor law of the State of Michigan are adequate to provide for proper supervision and regulation of the sale of alcoholic beverages, without the Act herein complained of...
• Because the Act, upon its face, shows an unjust and unfair classification, both as to sex and communities based upon population
• The classification attempted in said Act is not within the police power of the State of Michigan
• The attempted classification has nothing to do with the regulation of the liquor traffic in the State of Michigan, the said liquor traffic being fully regulated by previous statutes and rules and regulations of the defendants