Other Free Encyclopedias » Law Library - American Law and Legal Information » Notable Trials and Court Cases - 1981 to 1988

et al. Heckler v. Mathews - Question Of Gender Based Classification, Individual Rights And Congressional Intent, Circumvention Of Legislative Intent, Impact

court califano discrimination petitioner

Petitioner

Margaret M. Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human Services

Respondent

Robert H. Mathews, et al.

Petitioner's Claim

By permitting a brief, five-year exclusion period which temporarily revived gender-based discrimination in awarding retiree benefits to spouses, the Social Security Act, as amended in 1977, did not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Chief Lawyer for Petitioner

Mark L. Levy

Chief Lawyer for Respondent

John R. Benn

Justices for the Court

Harry A. Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Jr. (writing for the Court), Warren E. Burger, Thurgood Marshall, Sandra Day O'Connor, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist, John Paul Stevens, Byron R. White

Justices Dissenting

None

Place

Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

5 March 1984

Decision

Although 1977 amendments to the Social Security Act permitted unequal awarding of benefits between men and women, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the lower court ruling that there was no violation of the Due Process Clause; the provisions of a five-year exemption only temporarily revived gender-based discrimination for the justifiable protection of people who planned their retirements based on the old law.

Significance

In Heckler v. Mathews, et al. the Court reinforced the collaborative role between legislative and judicial branches of the government. The Court's ruling remained consistent with past decisions which held that gender discrimination was permissible under circumstances in which the government had a rational, overriding justification.

Related Cases

  • Simon v. Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights Organization, 426 U.S. 26 (1976).
  • Califano v. Goldfarb, 430 U.S. 199 (1977).
  • Califano v. Silbowitz, 430 U.S. 924 (1977).
  • Jablon v. Califano, 430 U.S. 924 (1977).
  • Gladstone, Realtors v. Village of Bellwood, 441 U.S. 91 (1979).

Sources

Branch, Kathryn. "Are Women Really Worth as Much as Men?: Employment Inequities, Gender Roles, and Public Policy (Part 3 or 4)." Duke Journal of Gender Law and Policy, 1 January 1994.

Further Readings

  • Hall, Kermit L., ed. The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.
Hishon v. King - Significance [next] [back] Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier - Significance, Privacy And The Right To Respond, At The Schoolhouse Gate, A Better Civics Lesson

User Comments

Your email address will be altered so spam harvesting bots can't read it easily.
Hide my email completely instead?

Cancel or