Frontiero v. Richardson, 411 U.S. 677

Supreme Court of the United States

1973

Chapter

5

Title

Equality and the Constitution

Page

622

Topic

Heightened Scrutiny and the Problem of Gender

Quick Notes

Under federal law, a male member of the armed services could automatically claim his spouse as a dependent, there by receiving a larger housing allowance and higher medical benefits.  However, a FEMALE service member could claim comparable benefits ONLY IF she demonstrated that her spouse was in fact dependant on her for over HALF his support.

Eight members of the Court agreed that this distinction violated the equal protection component of the fifth amendments due process clause.

Court Forbidden Scheme

o         Any statutory scheme which draws a sharp line between the sexes, solely for the purpose of achieving administrative convenience, necessarily commands "dissimilar treatment for men and women who are . . . similarly situated," and therefore involves the "very kind of arbitrary legislative choice forbidden by the [Constitution] . . . ." Reed v. Reed, 404 U.S., at 77, 76.

Court Holding

o         We therefore conclude that, by according differential treatment to male and female members of the uniformed services for the sole purpose of achieving administrative  convenience, the challenged statutes violate the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment insofar as they require a female member to prove the dependency of her husband.

The court reversed, holding that the statutory scheme involved the very kind of arbitrary legislative choice forbidden by the United States Constitution because it drew a sharp line between the sexes, solely for the purpose of achieving administrative convenience, necessarily commanding dissimilar treatment for men and women who were similarly situated

Book Name

Constitutional Law : Stone, Seidman, Sunstein, Tushnet.  ISBN:  978-0-7355-7719-0

Issue

o         Whether it is a violation of the Equal protection clause for a statute that grants GREATER medical benefits base on GENDER classification?  Yes.  Strict Scrutiny.

Procedure

Trial

o         United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama rejected appellants' contention that the statutory difference in treatment of male and female military personnel for purposes of determining "dependent" benefits.

Supreme

o         The court reversed, holding that the statutory scheme involved the very kind of arbitrary legislative choice forbidden by the United States Constitution because it drew a sharp line between the sexes, solely for the purpose of achieving administrative convenience, necessarily commanding dissimilar treatment for men and women who were similarly situated

Facts

Discussion

Key Phrases

Rules

Pl -  Frontiero

Df -  Richardson

Description

o          Under federal law, a male member of the armed services could automatically claim his spouse as a dependent, there by receiving a larger housing allowance and higher medical benefits. 

o         However, a FEMALE service member could claim comparable benefits ONLY IF she demonstrated that her spouse was in fact dependant on her for over HALF his support.

Justice Brennan

Classifications based on GENDER are inherently suspect

o         Like RACIAL classification, GENDER classifications should be subject to close scrutiny.

Nation has had a history of sex discrimination

o         Romantic paternalism put women in a cage.

Stereotyped distinctions of the sexes

o         Throughout much of the 19th century the position of women in our society was, in many respects, comparable to that of blacks under the pre-Civil War slave codes.

Could NOT:  VOTE, hold office, bring suit, own property, or hold office

o         Neither slaves nor women could hold office, serve on juries, or bring suit in their own names, and married women traditionally were denied the legal capacity to hold or convey property or to serve as legal guardians of their own children.

o         Blacks were given the right to vote before women.

Suspect Characteristic

o         The characteristic of sex frequently bears no relation to the ability to perform or contribute to society.

Civil Rights Act

o         Prohibits employment discriminations based on GENDER

Congress has concluded Sex classifications are invidious

o         Congress itself has concluded that classifications based upon sex are inherently invidious, and this conclusion of a coequal branch of Government is not without significance.

Strict Scrutiny

o         This classification cannot survive strict scrutiny.

Governments Arg

o         This differential treatment of men and women served the purpose of administrative convenience, since wives were usually dependent on their husbands for at least half their support, whereas husbands were RARELY similarly dependent upon their wives.

Courts Response

o         Government offered no concrete evidence to support this saving money view.

Court Forbidden Scheme

o         Any statutory scheme which draws a sharp line between the sexes, solely for the purpose of achieving administrative convenience, necessarily commands "dissimilar treatment for men and women who are . . . similarly situated," and therefore involves the "very kind of arbitrary legislative choice forbidden by the [Constitution] . . . ." Reed v. Reed, 404 U.S., at 77, 76.

Court Holding

o         We therefore conclude that, by according differential treatment to male and female members of the uniformed services for the sole purpose of achieving administrative  convenience, the challenged statutes violate the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment insofar as they require a female member to prove the dependency of her husband

Concurring Justice Powell

o         Did not agree that classifications based on sex are suspect.

o         He thought once ratified the equal protection amendment would resolve the issue.

o         He did not think the court should decide the will of the people.

Concurring - Justice Stewart

o         The statute was invidious discrimination in violation of the constitution.

Dissent Justice Rehnquist

Rules

Amendment V (Cannot be deprived life, liberty, or property without due process of law)

o    No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger;

Double Jeopardy

o    nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb;

Self-Incrimination

o    nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself,

Due Process

o    nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;

Property

o    nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Class Notes