FRONTIERO V. RICHARDSON
411 U.S. 677 (1973)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This was an appeal challenging the validity of federal legislation which denies military benefits based an employee's gender.
FACTS: When Frontiero (P) joined the Air Force, she claimed her husband as a dependent to receive an increased stipend for living expenses and for employee health insurance purposes. A federal statute bars all female military personnel from claiming their spouses as dependants unless a husband relies on his wife for more than 50 per cent of his support. Male military personnel can claim their wives without any such restrictions. There is no legislative history available to explain the reasons behind the adoption of this statute. The Court found that males represent 99% of the military personnel population; so requiring males to prove their spouses' dependency would create an administration burden compared to insubstantial burden placed on the small female population to prove their spouses' dependency. P asserted that this different treatment between military employees based on their gender was in violation of procedural and substantive Due Process. A three-judge District Court rejected this contention and sustained the constitutionality of the provisions of the statutes. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND
DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
No comments:
Post a Comment