Providing dissimilar treatment for men and women who are thus similarly situated, the challenged section violates the Equal Protection Clause. [Sally M. REED v. Cecil R. REED, 1971 SCC OnLine US SC 174, decided on 22-11-1971]
Full Answer
Why is Frontiero v richardson important?
Richardson (1973) | PBS. Sharron Frontiero, who won a gender discrimination lawsuit against the U.S. Air Force, with her husband Joseph. In Frontiero v. Richardson (1973), the Supreme Court ruled that a law classifying benefits on the basis of gender violated the Constitution, but it could not agree on why.
What happened in the Frontiero v richardson case?
Frontiero v. Richardson, 411 U.S. 677 (1973), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case which decided that benefits given by the United States military to the family of service members cannot be given out differently because of sex.
What year was Frontiero v Richardson?
1973Frontiero v. Richardson / Date decidedRichardson, 411 U.S. 677 (1973) Heightened scrutiny applies to disparate treatment based on gender, so a law is unconstitutional if it gives benefits to the spouses of only male but not female service members.
Who won the Reed v Reed case?
After a series of appeals by both Sally and Cecil Reed, the Supreme Court considered the case and delivered a unanimous decision that held the Idaho Code's preference in favor of males was arbitrary and unconstitutional.
What was the issue in Weinberger vs Wiesenfeld?
The Supreme Court held that the purpose of the social security benefits for the surviving spouse and children is to enable the surviving spouse to properly care for the children, regardless of the gender of the parent.
Who won Craig v Boren?
In a 7-to-2 decision, the Court held that the statute made unconstitutional gender classifications. The Court held that the statistics relied on by the state of Oklahoma were insufficient to show a substantial relationship between the law and the maintenance of traffic safety.
Who won Califano v Goldfarb?
In a 5-4 decision, the Court affirmed the District Court in holding the statute unconstitutional.
Who appointed RBG to the Supreme Court?
Bill ClintonRuth Bader Ginsburg / AppointerWilliam Jefferson Clinton is an American politician who served as the 42nd president of the United States from 1993 to 2001. He previously served as governor of Arkansas from 1979 to 1981 and again from 1983 to 1992, and as attorney general of Arkansas from 1977 to 1979. Wikipedia
Which amendment prohibits states from depriving persons of life liberty or property without due process of law?
The Fourteenth AmendmentThe Fifth Amendment says to the federal government that no one shall be "deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law." The Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, uses the same eleven words, called the Due Process Clause, to describe a legal obligation of all states.
What is the14th Amendment?
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Which group was affected by unequal treatment in Reed v. Reed?
1. Which group was affected by unequal treatment in Reed v. Reed? Women applying to become the executor of an estate were being treated unequally under the law in Reed, which gave preference to male applicants solely on the basis of sex.
What did the Supreme Court rule in Reed v. Reed 1971 explain?
The landmark Reed v. Reed decision, 404 U.S. 71 (1971), marked the first time in history that the Court applied the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to strike down a law that discriminated against women.
Which amendment required the same treatment for men and women who are similarly situated?
Ruling: The Court ruled that the statute required "dissimilar treatment for men and women who are similarly situated," violating the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause and its implied equal protection requirements.
Who authored the decision to ban discrimination against women?
Justice William Brennan authored the decision, noting that women in the U.S. faced pervasive discrimination in education, the job market and politics. He concluded that classifications based on sex should be subjected to strict judicial scrutiny, just like classifications based on race or national origin.
Which case found that the federal law required different criteria for male spouses of military members to receive benefits?
Frontiero v. Richardson found unconstitutional a federal law that required different criteria for male spouses of military members to receive benefits, as opposed to female spouses.
Who is the respondent in the case of Frontiero?
Petitioner: Sharron Frontiero, a lieutenant in the United States Air Force. Respondent: Elliot Richardson, Secretary of Defense.
What case did the Supreme Court rule that it was unfair to burden women and men with extra proof?
In Frontiero v. Richardson, the Supreme Court pointed out that not only was it unfair to burden women and not men with this extra proof, but men who could not offer similar proof about their wives would still receive benefits under the current law.
Why is it important to ask students to decide for themselves whether Ginsburg should be considered the Thurgood Marshall of women'?
Asking students to decide for themselves whether Ginsburg should be considered the Thurgood Marshall of women’s rights provides a way for them to dig into each Justice’s cases and strategies to make their arguments. Other questions related to the two great jurists have the potential to yield exciting historical discussions:
Who was the civil rights crusader who helped women?
We suggest that a comparison of Ginsburg with the great civil rights courtroom crusader, Thurgood Marshall, would help students link Ginsburg, and the overlooked history of her work for women’s rights, to history already taught in most schools: Marshall and his most famous court victory, Brown v. Board of Education (1954).
How did Ruth Bader Ginsburg compare to Thurgood Marshall?
A comparison of Ruth Bader Ginsburg with Thurgood Marshall enables students to see that social change comes not just via elections and demonstrations but also from battles waged in court. The road to Brown was paved by decades of civil rights cases argued by Thurgood Marshall of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. As Marshall had done for civil rights as an NAACP attorney, Ginsburg used her legal talent to lead the ACLU’s Women’s Rights Project to win historic court victories for gender equity from 1972-1980.
What was Thurgood Marshall's role in the Women's Movement?
Being called the Thurgood Marshall of the women’s movement resonated with Ginsburg since she admired and emulated his work as a legal strategist. She also reminds us that Marshall heroically endured threats she never faced: "He was my model as a lawyer … I took a step-by-step, incremental approach, well, that’s what Marshall did. He didn’t come to the Court on day one and say, ‘End apartheid in America.’ He started with law schools and universities, and until he had those building blocks, he didn’t ask the Court to end separate-but-equal. Of course, there was a huge difference between the litigation for gender equality in the ’70s and the civil rights struggles in the ’50s and ’60s. The difference between Thurgood Marshall and me, most notably, is that my life was never in danger. His was. He would go to a Southern town to defend people and he literally didn’t know whether he would be alive at the end of the day. [5]
Who brandished the Constitution the way Moses brandished the Ten Commandments?
As a lawyer, Marshall “brandished the Constitution the way Moses brandished the Ten Commandments.”. [2] Like Marshall, Ginsburg felt the sting of discrimination, particularly as a woman lawyer, and used the Constitution to steadily erode longstanding gender inequities.
What the Fourteenth Amendment Says
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
Frequently Asked Questions
Yes and no. Though it technically does not make gender discrimination illegal, the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees people of all genders equal treatment and due process under the law. Other statutes, like the Civil Rights Act, make gender discrimination illegal more directly.
What It Means
United States Library of Congress, The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation
The Intermediate Scrutiny Standard
Assumptions about the relative positions of the sexes, however, are not without some basis in fact, and sex may sometimes be a reliable proxy for the characteristic, such as need, with which it is the legislature's actual intention to deal.
Alimony
Invalidating an Alabama law imposing alimony obligations upon males but not upon females, the Court in Orr v. Orr acknowledged that assisting needy spouses was a legitimate and important governmental objective.
Single Parents
Various forms of discrimination between unwed mothers and unwed fathers received different treatments based on the Court's perception of the justifications and presumptions underlying each. A New York law permitted the unwed mother but not the unwed father of a child born out of wedlock to block his adoption by withholding consent.
Gender Equality and Government Benefits
The issue of sex qualifications for the receipt of governmental financial benefits has divided the Court and occasioned close distinctions.
What is the meaning of section 15-312?
Section 15-312 2 designates the persons who are entitled to administer the estate of one who dies intestate. In making these designations, that section lists 11 classes of persons who are so entitled and provides, in substance, 73*73 that the order in which those classes are listed in the section shall be determinative of the relative rights of competing applicants for letters of administration. One of the 11 classes so enumerated is ” [t]he father or mother” of the person dying intestate. Under this section, then, appellant and appellee, being members of the same entitlement class, would seem to have been equally entitled to administer their son’s estate. Section 15-314 provides, however, that
Who argued the cause for appellee?
Charles S. Stout argued the cause for appellee. With him on the brief was Myron E. Anderson.