Question: Which group Coleman v. Miller or Berghuis v. Thompkins has to do with the child labor act of of 1924?
Context: Hammer v. Dagenhart, 247 U.S. 251 (1918), was a United States Supreme Court decision involving the power of Congress to enact child labor laws.  The Court held regulation of child labor in purely internal (to a single state) manufacturing, the products of which may never enter interstate commerce, to be beyond the power of Congress, distinguishing the "Lottery" line of cases, which concerned Congressional regulation of harms (e.g. interstate sale of lottery tickets) that required the use of interstate commerce. Coleman v. Miller, 307 U.S. 433 (1939) is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court which clarified that if the Congress of the United States—when proposing for ratification an amendment to the United States Constitution, pursuant to Article V thereof—chooses "not" to set a deadline by which the state legislatures of three-fourths of the states or, if prescribed by Congress State ratifying conventions in three-fourths of the states, must act upon the proposed amendment, then the proposed amendment remains pending business before the state legislatures (or conventions).  The case centered on the Child Labor Amendment, which was proposed for ratification by Congress in 1924. Child labor laws in the United States address issues related to the employment and welfare of working minors and children in the United States.  The most sweeping federal law that restricts the employment and abuse of child workers is the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).  Child labor provisions under FLSA are designed to protect the educational opportunities of youth and prohibit their employment in jobs that are detrimental to their health and safety.  FLSA restricts the hours that youth under 16 years of age can work and lists hazardous occupations too dangerous for young workers to perform. The Global march against child labor came about in 1998 due to the overwhelming response of the need to end child labor.  It was a grassroot movement that motivated many individuals and organizations to come together and fight against child labor and not an annual march. Child labor in Bolivia is a widespread phenomenon.  A 2014 document on the worst forms of child labor released by the U.S. Department of Labor estimated that approximately 20.2% of children between the ages of 7 and 14, or 388,541 children make up the labor force in Bolivia.  Indigenous children are more likely to be engaged in labor than children who reside in urban areas.  The activities of child laborers are diverse, however the majority of child laborers are involved in agricultural labor, and this activity varies between urban and rural areas.  Bolivia has ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1990.  Bolivia has also ratified the International Labour Organization’s Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (138) and the ILO’s worst forms of child labor convention (182).  In July 2014, the Bolivian government passed the new child and adolescent code, which lowered the minimum working age to ten years old given certain working conditions The new code stipulates that children between the ages of ten and twelve can legally work given they are self-employed while children between 12 and 14 may work as contracted laborers as long as their work does not interfere with their education and they work under parental supervision. Sweatshop (or sweat factory) is a pejorative term for a workplace that has poor, socially unacceptable working conditions.  The work may be difficult, dangerous, climatically challenged or underpaid.  Workers in sweatshops may work long hours with low pay, regardless of laws mandating overtime pay or a minimum wage; child labor laws may also be violated.  The Fair Labor Association's "2006 Annual Public Report" inspected factories for FLA compliance in 18 countries including Bangladesh, El Salvador, Colombia, Guatemala, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, China, India, Vietnam, Honduras, Indonesia, Brazil, Taiwan, Mexico, and the U.S.  The U.S. Department of Labor's "2015 Findings on the Worst Forms of Child Labor" found that "18 countries did not meet the [International Labor Organization's] recommendation for an adequate number of inspectors." Bailey v. Drexel Furniture Co., 259 U.S. 20 (1922) , was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled the 1919 Child Labor Tax Law unconstitutional as an improper attempt by Congress to penalize employers using child labor.  The Court indicated that the tax imposed by the statute was actually a penalty in disguise. The Keating-Owen Child Labor Act of 1916 also known as Wick's Bill, was a short-lived statute enacted by the U.S. Congress which sought to address child labor by prohibiting the sale in interstate commerce of goods produced by factories that employed children under fourteen, mines that employed children younger than sixteen, and any facility where children under fourteen worked after 7:00 p.m. or before 6:00 a.m. or more than eight hours daily.  The Bill was accepted after its first failure to be enacted, was revised and re-introduced.  The basis for the action was the constitutional clause giving Congress the task of regulating interstate commerce. The Harkin–Engel Protocol, sometimes referred to as the Cocoa Protocol, is an international agreement aimed at ending the worst forms of child labor (according to the International Labour Organization's Convention 182) and forced labor (according to ILO Convention 29) in the production of cocoa, the main ingredient in chocolate.  The protocol was negotiated by Senator Tom Harkin and Representative Eliot Engel in response to a documentary and multiple articles in 2000 and 2001 reporting widespread child slavery and child trafficking in the production of cocoa.  The protocol was signed in September 2001.  Joint Statements in 2001, 2005 and 2008 and a Joint Declaration in 2010 extended the commitment to address the problem.  As of 2012, it is unclear if the protocol reduced child labor in the production of cocoa, though the cocoa industry claims five of the six articles have been addressed and the final one is being actively pursued. Berghuis v. Thompkins, 560 U.S. 370 (2010) (docket 08-1470), is a decision by the United States Supreme Court in which the Court considered the position of a suspect who understands his or her right to remain silent under "Miranda v. Arizona" and is aware he or she has the right to remain silent, but does not explicitly invoke or waive the right.
Answer: Coleman v. Miller