Frontiero v. Richardson - Significance, A Federal Problem, A Matter Of Convenience, Strict Scrutiny, Further Readings

Frontiero v. Richardson - Further Readings

Frontiero v. Richardson - Significance

The assumption that "the husband in our society is generally the `breadwinner' in the family [while] the wife [is] typically the `dependent' partner," was shown to be no longer valid. The justices also came within one vote of finding sex an "inherently suspect" category for equal protection purposes. In this lawsuit, Sharron Frontiero, a married U.S. Air Force lieutenant, and her husband, Joseph, …

Frontiero v. Richardson - A Federal Problem

Frontiero v. Richardson - A Matter Of Convenience

The Court heard arguments on 17 January 1973. Samuel Huntington, representing the federal government, argued that, in the uniformed services, men and women were treated differently by the law for "administrative convenience." He said that American wives were usually dependent upon their husbands, but that American husbands were not usually dependent upon their wives. For this reason, Congress had …

Frontiero v. Richardson - Strict Scrutiny

On 14 May 1973, the Court--with only Justice Rehnquist dissenting--overturned the federal statute. Four of the justices-- Brennan, Douglas, Marshall, and White--agreed that laws discriminating because of sex were inherently suspect and subject to strict judicial scrutiny. Brennan detailed the historical similarities in race and sex discrimination in America, and the "accident of birth" common to e…