Dothard v. Rawlinson
Case Background, The District Court Rules, A Split Decision, Dissenting Opinions, Further Readings
E. C. Dothard, et al.
Dianne Rawlinson, et al.
That an Alabama law establishing height and weight requirements for state prison guards and barring women from serving as guards in male prisons was permissible under federal civil rights law.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
C. Daniel Evans
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Pamela S. Horowitz
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Jr., Warren E. Burger, Thurgood Marshall, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist, John Paul Stevens, Potter Stewart (writing for the Court)
Byron R. White
Date of Decision
27 June 1977
Alabama's ban on women prison guards was permissible under federal civil rights law, but its height and weight requirements were not.
The Supreme Court's decision in Dothard v. Rawlinson clarified the Court's interpretation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The Supreme Court's decision in Dothard v. Rawlinson was referred to in a number of subsequent sex discrimination cases.
- Furnco Construction Corp. v. Waters, 438 U.S. 567 (1978).
- Connecticut v. Teal, 457 U.S. 440 (1982).
- Wards Cove Packing v. Atonio, 490 U.S. 642 (1989).
- Automobile Workers v. Johnson Controls, Inc., 499 U.S. 187 (1991).
- Doyle v. Ohio - Significance
- Doe v. McMillan - Significance, The Lower Court Rulings, The Supreme Court Ruling, Legislative Acts Immune From Suit
- Dothard v. Rawlinson - Further Readings
- Dothard v. Rawlinson - Case Background
- Dothard v. Rawlinson - The District Court Rules
- Dothard v. Rawlinson - A Split Decision
- Dothard v. Rawlinson - Dissenting Opinions
- Other Free Encyclopedias