less than 1 minute read

Frontiero v. Richardson

A Federal Problem



The Frontieros claimed the federal government had abridged their rights. They said that the law violated the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. (While the Fifth Amendment actually contains only "due process" language and no "equal protection" clause, it had long been interpreted by the Supreme Court to require the federal government to grant the same "equal protection" specifically required of the states by the Fourteenth Amendment.)



Ruth Bader Ginsburg had argued another case on behalf of the Women's Rights Project (WRP) of the American Civil Liberties Union, and the WRP now asked the Frontieros' lawyer, Joseph J. Levin, Jr., if the organization might join his Supreme Court appeal. He agreed. The Court granted special leave for the organization to act as amicus curiae, and gave Ginsburg 10 of the 30 minutes in which the Frontieros' case was argued.

Additional topics

Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1973 to 1980Frontiero v. Richardson - Significance, A Federal Problem, A Matter Of Convenience, Strict Scrutiny, Further Readings