Facts of the Case
The Idaho Probate Code specified that "males must be preferred to females" in appointing administrators of estates. After the death of their adopted son, both Sally and Cecil Reed sought to be named the administrator of their son's estate (the Reeds were separated). According to the Probate Code, Cecil was appointed administrator and Sally challenged the law in court.
Questions
Did the Idaho Probate Code violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
Conclusions
-
In a unanimous decision, the Court held that the law's dissimilar treatment of men and women was unconstitutional. The Court argued that "[t]o give a mandatory preference to members of either sex over members of the other, merely to accomplish the elimination of hearings on the merits, is to make the very kind of arbitrary legislative choice forbidden by the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. . .[T]he choice in this context may not lawfully be mandated solely on the basis of sex."
Abortion and the Courts
Online Debate
The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, passed by...
US v. Virginia: The New and Improved Equal Protection Clause
Civil Rights Practice Group Newsletter - Volume 1, Issue 2, Spring 1997
Last summer's 7-1 Supreme Court decision in the Virginia Military Institute (VMI) case, United States...
