Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Sexual Equality and the Burger Court

Bibliographic Data

ID3319879
AuthorsJudith A Baer (State University of New York at Albany, corresponding author)
Year1978
Volume31
Issue4
Pages470-491
Publication date1978-12-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueThe Western Political Quarterly (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0043-4078 • E-ISSN: 2325-8675
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/106591297803100402
OpenAlexW2094460754
LanguageEN
Citations received7

N THE FIRST eight years of Warren Burger's Chief Justiceship, the United States Supreme Court gained a reputation as a friend of women's rights. The justices not only resisted attempts to weaken laws prohibiting sex discrimination,1 but departed from long-established precedent to strike down laws requiring it. In 1971, in Reed v. Reed,2 the Court, for the first time, read the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to invalidate such a law. Two terms later, in Frontiero v. Richardson,3 the Court came tantalizingly close to declaring sex an inherently suspect classification. Between 1971 and 1976, the Constitution was held to prohibit an automatic preference for males as estate administrators,4 mandatory maternity leaves,5 and discrimination against pregnant women in unemployment insurance,6 to entitle women military personnel to equal dependency benefits,7 to give women workers equal Social Security protection for their survivors,8 and to require that a state set the same age of majority for both sexes.9 Several of these decisions have had direct, profound impact on women's lives. And the decision which has undoubtedly had the greatest impact is Roe v. Wade,r0 in which the Court included a limited right to abortion within the privacy protected by the Constitution. Not only has the Court abandoned the almost josephic aversion to women' evinced by earlier cases, but this new receptivity to feminist claims contrasted sharply with the Court's refusal to enlarge,12 and efforts to constrain,13 the judicial arena, its cautious approach to racial discrimination,'4 and its reluctance to recognize new fundamental rights15 or suspect classifications.16 Women may be the only group to have fared better before the Burger Court than before the Warren Court. With two sweeps of the pen, the Court has negated its reputation as a feminist sympathizer. The first sweep was General Electric Co. v. Gilbert,l7 in December

Law and economics · Political science · Sociology · Discrimination and Equality Law · Law in Society and Culture · Legal Issues in South Africa · Legal Systems and Judicial Processes · Psychology

  • Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the Supreme Court's Reaction to Its Second Female Member

    Barbara Palmer•Women & Politics•2002

  • Women in the American Judiciary

    Barbara Palmer•Women & Politics•2001

  • Women's Rights and the Limits of Constitutional Doctrine

    Open Access•Judith A Baer•The Western Political Quarterly•1991

  • The Supreme Court and Sex Discrimination

    Open Access•Jeffrey A Segal, Cheryl D Reedy•The Western Political Quarterly•1988

Unique citing works4
Citations per year0,18
Citation span1988 - 2002 (15)
Citation velocityhistorical
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 5

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae