court cases
Case: Bradwell v. Illinois (1872) /
Issue: Does the Privileges and Immunities Clause protect a woman’s right to practice law?
Ruling: No. The Court upheld Illinois’ refusal to grant a woman a law license.
Legal Basis: Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Impact: Reinforced gender discrimination in employment, citing traditional roles.
Date: 1872
Case: Goesaert v. Cleary (1948) /
Issue: Does a Michigan law prohibiting women from bartending unless related to the bar owner violate the Constitution?
Ruling: No. The Court upheld the law, citing a rational basis for regulating morals.
Legal Basis: Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Impact: Allowed sex-based occupational restrictions.
Date: 1948
Case: Brown v. Board of Education (1954) /
Issue: Does racial segregation in public schools violate the Equal Protection Clause?
Ruling: Yes. The Court declared segregation in public schools unconstitutional.
Legal Basis: Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Impact: Overturned Plessy v. Ferguson and declared “separate but equal” unconstitutional.
Date: 1954
Case: Miranda v. Arizona (1966) /
Issue: Does the Fifth Amendment require law enforcement to inform individuals of their rights during interrogation?
Ruling: Yes. The Court established the requirement to provide “Miranda warnings.”
Legal Basis: Fifth Amendment.
Impact: Strengthened protections against self-incrimination during police interrogations.
Date: 1966
Case: Weeks v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Company (1969) /
Issue: Does a refusal to promote a woman based on sex violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act?
Ruling: Yes. The Court found this discriminatory practice unconstitutional.
Legal Basis: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Impact: One of the first cases to enforce Title VII for sex discrimination.
Date: 1969
Case: Diaz v. Pan Am. World Airways, Inc. (1971) /
Issue: Can an airline refuse to hire male flight attendants based on customer preference?
Ruling: No. The Court ruled this practice violated Title VII.
Legal Basis: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Impact: Challenged “bona fide occupational qualifications” based on sex stereotypes.
Date: 1971
Case: Reed v. Reed (1971) /
Issue: Does a law favoring men over women as estate administrators violate the Equal Protection Clause?
Ruling: Yes. The Court struck down the law.
Legal Basis: Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Impact: Marked the first time the Court invalidated a law for sex discrimination under the Equal Protection Clause.
Date: 1971
Case: Craig v. Boren (1976) /
Issue: Does a law setting different drinking ages for men and women violate the Equal Protection Clause?
Ruling: Yes. The Court ruled the law unconstitutional.
Legal Basis: Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Impact: Established intermediate scrutiny for gender discrimination cases.
Date: 1976
Case: U.S. v. Virginia (1996) /
Issue: Does the Virginia Military Institute’s male-only admissions policy violate the Equal Protection Clause?
Ruling: Yes. The Court ruled the policy unconstitutional.
Legal Basis: Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Impact: Reinforced intermediate scrutiny for gender-based policies.
Date: 1996
Case: Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins (1989) /
Issue: Can gender stereotyping be a basis for workplace discrimination claims under Title VII?
Ruling: Yes. Adverse employment decisions based on gender stereotypes violate Title VII.
Legal Basis: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Impact: Expanded workplace protections against gender stereotyping.
Date: 1989
Case: Jespersen v. Harrah’s Operating Company, Inc. (2006) /
Issue: Does a grooming policy requiring women to wear makeup violate Title VII?
Ruling: No. The Court upheld the policy, ruling it did not impose unequal burdens.
Legal Basis: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Impact: Limited the scope of sex discrimination claims for appearance-based policies.
Date: 2006
Case: Romer v. Evans (1996) /
Issue: Does a Colorado amendment prohibiting protections for LGBTQ individuals violate the Constitution?
Ruling: Yes. The Court struck down the amendment.
Legal Basis: Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Impact: Established that laws targeting LGBTQ individuals must have a rational basis.
Date: 1996
Case: Lawrence v. Texas (2003) /
Issue: Does a law criminalizing consensual same-sex conduct violate the Constitution?
Ruling: Yes. The Court invalidated the law.
Legal Basis: Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Impact: Overturned Bowers v. Hardwick and expanded LGBTQ rights.
Date: 2003
Case: Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) /
Issue: Does the Constitution guarantee same-sex couples the right to marry?
Ruling: Yes. The Court recognized marriage equality.
Legal Basis: Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Impact: Legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.
Date: 2015
Case: Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia (2020) /
Issue: Does Title VII prohibit workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity?
Ruling: Yes. The Court interpreted Title VII as protecting LGBTQ employees.
Legal Basis: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Impact: Extended workplace protections to LGBTQ employees.
Date: 2020
Case: B.P.J. v. West Virginia State Board of Education (2024) /
Issue: Does a law prohibiting transgender students from participating in school sports consistent with their gender identity violate Title IX?
Ruling: Yes. The Court found the law unconstitutional.
Legal Basis: Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972.
Impact: Affirmed protections for transgender students under Title IX.
Date: 2024
Case: Roe v. Wade (1973) /
Issue: Does the Constitution protect a woman’s right to abortion?
Ruling: Yes, prior to viability. Established a trimester framework.
Legal Basis: Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Impact: Recognized abortion as a constitutional right.
Date: 1973
Case: Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) /
Issue: Can states regulate abortion without imposing an undue burden?
Ruling: Yes, but the undue burden standard must be met.
Legal Basis: Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Impact: Modified Roe by removing the trimester framework.
Date: 1992
Case: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022) /
Issue: Does the Constitution protect the right to abortion?
Ruling: No. The Court overturned Roe and Casey.
Legal Basis: Rejected substantive due process as a basis for abortion rights.
Impact: Returned abortion regulation to states.
Date: 2022