• Last updated on November 11, 2022

The Supreme Court adopted a heightened level of judicial scrutiny when dealing with gender-based classifications alleged to be discriminatory.

Oklahoma law permitted eighteen-year-old women to purchase beer with 3.2 percent alcohol but required men to be twenty-one years old for the same privilege. Curtis Craig and a licensed vendor challenged the law. The state had statistical evidence demonstrating a reasonable basis for the law. The Supreme Court had recognized since 1971 that the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applied to classifications based on sex. The issue in the Craig case was whether the law should be evaluated according to the rational basis test or the very demanding standard of strict scrutiny, as used in classifications based on race.[case]Craig v. Boren[Craig v. Boren]Judicial scrutiny, levels ofDiscrimination, sex;Craig v. Boren[Craig v. Boren]Judicial scrutiny, levels of

By a vote of seven to two, the Court found that the Oklahoma law was unconstitutional. Writing for the majority, Justice William J. Brennan, Jr.,Brennan, William J., Jr.;Craig v. Boren[Craig v. Boren] demanded that any statute classifying by gender “must serve important governmental objectives and must be substantially related to these objectives.” Although the justices were badly divided, Craig established the intermediate level of scrutiny for determining whether particular gender distinctions are constitutional, and the compromise has continued ever since. Apparently, the decision did not apply to cases involving affirmative action programs.[case]Craig v. Boren[Craig v. Boren]

Equal protection clause

Frontiero v. Richardson

Gender issues

Judicial scrutiny

Michael M. v. Superior Court of Sonoma County

Reed v. Reed

Rostker v. Goldberg

Categories: History Content