Frontiero v. Richardson
Significance, A Federal Problem, A Matter Of Convenience, Strict Scrutiny, Further Readings
Petitioners
Sharron A. Frontiero, Joseph Frontiero
Respondents
Elliot L. Richardson, Secretary of Defense, et al.
Petitioners' Claim
That requiring different criteria for male spouses of female military personnel--as opposed to female spouses--to qualify for benefits is a violation of the Fifth Amendment.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioners
Joseph L. Levin, Jr.
Chief Lawyer for Respondents
Samuel Huntington
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Jr. (writing for the Court), Warren E. Burger, William O. Douglas, Thurgood Marshall, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., Potter Stewart, Byron R. White
Justices Dissenting
William H. Rehnquist
Place
Washington, D.C.
Date of Decision
14 May 1973
Decision
The federal statutes violated the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause and were overturned.
Related Cases
- Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld, 420 U.S. 636 (1975).
- Califano v. Goldfarb, 430 U.S. 199 (1977).
Additional topics
- Frontiero v. Richardson - Further Readings
- Foley v. Connelie - Decision, Significance, The Rights Of Immigrants, Impact
- Frontiero v. Richardson - Further Readings
- Frontiero v. Richardson - Significance
- Frontiero v. Richardson - A Federal Problem
- Frontiero v. Richardson - A Matter Of Convenience
- Frontiero v. Richardson - Strict Scrutiny
- Other Free Encyclopedias
Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1973 to 1980