Constitutional Law October 20, 2004

1
Constitutional LawOctober 20, 2004

• Equal Protection Due Process
• Equal Protection (Classifications)
• Race as a Suspect Classification
• Gender as a QS Classification
• Introduction
• Gender as (Quasi) Suspect
• Evolution of IS
• United States v. Virginia
• Inconsistent Application
• Other Suspect Classifications
• Disparate Impact
• Affirmative Action

2
Recap

• Race (and National Origin) as Suspect
• Korematzu and Strict Scrutiny
• Application of Strict Scrutiny
• Loving Palmore
• What Might Survive
• What Makes Race Suspect

3
5. Class vs. Classification

• Group Perspective
• Suspect b/c Process Failure
• Discrete and Insular
• Historical Discrimination
• Individual Right of Fair Treatment
• Suspect b/c Inherently Unfair
• Stigma and Stereotypes
• Immutability

Link
4
c. Implications

• Current Emphasis
• Individual Rights
• Suspect Classifications
• Affects
• Other Candidates for Elevated Scrutiny
• Affirmative Action
• Disparate Impact

5
A Matter of Perspective
6
1. Introduction

• Idea of a Suspect Classification
• Race as Paradigm Case
• Expansion Beyond Race
• Factors
• History of Discrimination
• Political Powerlessness
• Stigma and Stereotypes
• Immutability
• Class vs. Classification

Political Process
Individual Fairness
7
2. Gender As Suspect
8
3.Evolution of IS

• Early Acceptance (Goesart v. Cleary)
• Reed v. Reed
• Preference in Estate Administration
• Failed Rational Basis
• Frontiero v. Richardson
• Presumption of dependency
• Plurality Embraced Strict Scrutiny
• Craig v. Boren

9
d. Craig v. Boren

• Oklahoma Drinking Age
• Intermediate Scrutiny (link)
• Application
• Purpose Traffic Safety
• Fit
• Overinclusive (only 2 of males)
• Underinclusive (males gt 21 and females)
• Rehnquist Dissent

10
4. US v. Virginia (VMI)

• Males only state military academy
• Educational benefits of diversity
• Might be sufficient
• Not the actual purpose here
• Adversative training destroyed
• Not proved
• Self-fulfilling prophesy
• Remedy
• Women-Only Alternative Insufficient
• Compare Pre-Brown cases

11
5. Inconsistent Application

• Gender Classifications Sometimes Upheld
• Intermediate Scrutiny Uncertainties
• Purpose
• Actual Purpose/Evidence to Support?
• How important?
• Fit
• Tolerate over and under inclusiveness?
• Nondiscriminatory alternatives?
• Real Differences as Key

12
Real Difference or Stereotype?

• Michael M. (statutory rape law)
• Virtually all harms of pregnancy on female
• Underage females deterred by pregnancy
• Rostker v. Goldberg (draft registration)
• Only men can be drafted
• Underlying stereotype
• Nguyen v. INS (children of US citizens)
• Maternity not in Doubt
• Relationship/Bond Established at Birth

13
Intermediate Scrutiny
. . . previous cases establish that
classifications by gender must serve important
governmental objectives and must be substantially
related to achievement of those objectives.
Back
14
Class vs. Classification
Classification
Class
Class

Majority
Minority
1. Victims of Past Discrimination 2. Lack
Political Power
1. Beneficiaries of Past Discrimination 2. Have
Political Power
3. Stigma Stereotypes 4. Immutable
Characteristic
Back