Frontiero v. Richardson

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is generally the `breadwinner' in the family [while] the wife [is] typically the `dependent' partner," was shown to be no longer valid.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, a veteran and full-time college student, challenged a federal statute. The law automatically granted male members of the "uniformed forces" housing and other benefits for their wives. However, it required its female members to demonstrate the "actual dependency" of their husbands before granting the same benefit.

According to the statute, a woman's husband was "actually dependent" if his wife provided more than half of his living expenses. Because Joseph Frontiero received $205 per month in veteran's benefits, Sharron Frontiero paid less than half of his living expenses, which were $354 per month. Denied the increased medical and dental benefits for her husband and the same housing allowance that a married male lieutenant automatically received for his spouse, the Frontieros sued. In 1972, the three-judge U.S. Court for the Middle District of Alabama denied the Frontieros request for relief. Next the Frontieros appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.