{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.038267875125881166, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004028197381671702, 'mean_word_length': 5.808219178082192, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Thirteenth Amendment at the Intersection of Class and Gender: Robertson v. Baldwin's Exclusion of Infants, Lunatics, Women, and Seamen

Slavery was but one of many hierarchical relations, including parent-child, husband-wife, master-apprentice, and master-servant, that arose within the legally constructed household. The Thirteenth Amendment’s prohibition on slavery and involuntary servitude, which contained no explicit domestic exception, inevitably raised the question whether domestic relations other than chattel slavery would be affected. The Supreme Court’s ruling in Robertson v. Baldwin (1897) carved out a domestic exception to the Amendment for children, wards, adult seamen and – in practice – women in intimate relationships. This article, written for a symposium on the Thirteenth Amendment and class, examines the origins, justifications, scholarship, and case law of Robertson’s domestic exception, including its application to seamen, abused children and battered women.