|
|
Frontiero v. Richardson, 411 U.S. 677 (1973)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Frontiero v. Richardson, 411 U.S. 677 (1973)
Frontiero v. Richardson No. 71-1694 Argued January 17, 1973 Decided May 14, 1973 411 U.S. 677
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
Syllabus
A married woman Air Force officer (hereafter appellant) sought increased benefits for her husband as a "dependent" under 37 U.S.C. §§ 401, 403, and 10 U.S.C. §§ 1072, 1076. Those statutes provide, solely for administrative convenience, that spouses of male members of the uniformed services are dependents for purposes of obtaining increased quarters allowances and medical and dental benefits, but that spouses of female members are not dependents unless they are in fact, dependent for over one-half of their support. When her application was denied for failure to satisfy the statutory dependency standard, appellant and her husband brought this suit in District Court, contending that the statutes deprived servicewomen of due process. From that Court’s adverse ruling, they took a direct appeal.
Held: The judgment is reversed. Pp. 682-691; 691-692.
341 F.Supp. 201, reversed.
MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN, joined by MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS, MR. JUSTICE WHITE, and MR. JUSTICE MARSHALL, concluded that 37 U.S.C. §§ 401, 403 and 10 U.S.C. §§ 1072, 1076, as inherently suspect statutory classifications based on sex, are so unjustifiably discriminatory as to violate the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Pp. 682-691.
MR. JUSTICE STEWART concluded that the challenged statutes work an invidious discrimination in violation of the Constitution. Reed v. Reed, 404 U.S. 71. P. 691.
MR. JUSTICE POWELL, joined by THE CHIEF JUSTICE and MR. JUSTICE BLACKMUN, while agreeing that the statutes deprive servicewomen of due process, concluded that, in the light of Reed v. Reed, 404 U.S. 71, and the fact that the Equal Rights Amendment has been submitted to the States for ratification, it is inappropriate to decide at this time whether sex is a suspect classification. Pp. 691-692.
BRENNAN, J., announced the Court’s judgment and delivered an opinion, in which DOUGLAS, WHITE, and MARSHALL, JJ., joined. STEWART, J., filed a statement concurring in the judgment, post, p. 691. POWELL, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which BURGER, C.J., and BLACKMUN, J., joined, post, p. 691. REHNQUIST, J., filed a dissenting statement, post, p. 691.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Frontiero v. Richardson, 411 U.S. 677 (1973) in 411 U.S. 677 411 U.S. 678. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=XZBS4XSLERL9WDR.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Frontiero v. Richardson, 411 U.S. 677 (1973), in 411 U.S. 677, page 411 U.S. 678. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=XZBS4XSLERL9WDR.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Frontiero v. Richardson, 411 U.S. 677 (1973). cited in 1973, 411 U.S. 677, pp.411 U.S. 678. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=XZBS4XSLERL9WDR.
|