Lesson 4 Equal Protection: Gender

Lesson 4: Equal Protection: Gender

Topic:

To what extent did the Frontiero and Arizona Governing Committee cases help American Woman in their struggle for equality?

Background:

The successful campaign to pass the 19th Amendment created a whole new group of voters. But those who thought that women’s suffrage would quickly narrow the gender gap were wrong. Inequality persisted in many aspects of American life for years to come. Encouraged by the victories African-Americans gained in the courts beginning in the 1950's, women turned to the judicial system as a means of redressing their grievances.

Frontiero and Arizona Government Committee represented attempts by the petitioners to gain equality for women in the area of compensation in the workplace. In Frontiero v. Richardson, Sharon Frontiero challenged a federal law that automatically awarded a salary supplement to married males in the armed forces, while imposing special conditions on females in the service, seeking to obtain the same supplement. In Arizona Governing Committee v. Norris, Norris a female employee of the state of Arizona, attempted to overturn the state’s policy of requiring females to contribute more to their deferred compensation plans for retirement than males earning the same salary.

In both Frontiero and Arizona Governing Committee, the courts found that the females were denied equal protection of the laws

Objectives:

Students will be able to:

Analyze the decisions reached in the Frontiero and Arizona Governing Committee cases.
Assess the impact of the Frontier and Arizona Governing Committee on the struggle for equality of American women.

Materials:

Handout 4A "Writing Legal Briefs: Frontiero v. Richardson (1973)"

Handout 4B "Arguments: Frontiero v. Richardson (1973)"

Handout 4C "Arizona Governing Committee v. Norris Cartoon"

Time Required:

1 class period

Procedures:

Distribute Handout 4A, "Writing Legal Briefs: Frontiero v. Richardson (1973)." Assign half the class the role of attorneys for Frontiero and the other half the role of attorneys for Richardson. Have students complete the exercise on the handout.

Then have them explain/ answer the following:

Discuss the most important facts of this case?
What arguments did those of you who were attorneys for Frontiero raise?
How did those of you acting as Frontiero’s attorneys use the equal protection concept implied in the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause to support your case?
What arguments did those of you who were attorneys for Richardson raise?
How did those of you acting as Richardson’s attorneys respond to the argument based on the equal protection concept implied in the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause, raised by Frontiero?
Which is the most important legal issue raised in this case?

Distribute Handout 4B, "Arguments: Frontiero v. Richardson (1973)." Have students complete the exercise on the handout. Then have them explain/ answer the following:

What are the strongest arguments raised by Frontiero? What is Frontiero’s weakest argument?
What are the strongest arguments raised by Richardson, on behalf of the armed services? What is Richardson’s weakest argument?
If you were a justice in the Frontiero case, what would have been your decision?

Distribute Handout 4C,"Arizona Governing Committee v. Norris Cartoon." Have students complete the exercise on the handout, then have them explain/answer the following:

What do we learn from this cartoon about the Arizona Governing Committee v. Norris case?
Discuss the arguments you raised in favor of the Arizona Governing Committee?
Discuss the arguments you raised in favor of Norris?
Which side has the stronger case?
How do you think the Court decided? Explain your answers?

Performance Assessment:

Have students participate in mini-moot courts based on the facts of the Frontiero and Arizona Governing Committee cases. In such an activity, the class is divided into groups of three students each, where two of the students take the sides of the opposing attorneys and the third students plays the role of the judge. After listening to both attorneys present their cases and then, rebut, judges will render a decision.

Have students research the decision in the Frontiero and Arizona Governing Committee cases, then have them write editorials, analyzing and expressing their opinions about the decisions in one or both cases. The editorials should conclude with an assessment of the significance of the decisions to the American woman’s struggle for equality. Additionally, student’s can offer these editorials to the class, orally, in the form of commentaries as are regularly done by television journalists.

After engaging in research, have two teams of students engage in a debate, scored by the rest of the class. The topic of the debate is, "Resolved: Title VII has played an important role in the struggle for equality of American women."

Further Enrichment:

Based on multiple intelligence theory.

Linguistic: Have students use a variety of sources to research articles about equality of women in the workplace. Based on the information found in the research, students should determine whether women have or have not achieved equality in the workplace and write an editorial for a major newspaper summarizing their view.

Have students research the decision in the Frontiero case. Then have them compare the decision reached by the class with the actual decision. What are the similarities and differences both in the decisions and the reasoning?

Have students research the Arizona Governing Committee case. Have students compare the arguments they raised for both sides with the arguments presented by the justices.

Ask students to determine the significance of the Frontiero and Arizona Governing Committee's decisions in the struggle for women's equality.

Logical/Mathematical: Have students isolate the data from their research in the linguistic activity. Then have them explain how each piece of data supports or refutes the view that women have achieved equality in the workplace. Based on research from a variety of sources including TV, radio, the internet, magazines etc. have students determine the areas of inequality between men and women in the workplace that still exist despite the decisions reached in Frontiero and Arizona Governing Committee.

Have students cite at least three ways that the decisions in Frontiero and Arizona Governing Committee are similar and three ways that they are different.

Kinesthetic: Instruct the class to conduct a call in radio show with lawyers for both the plaintiff and defendant in Frontiero v. Richardson, and an expert on women's rights as guests. After the guests complete a panel discussion, students should call in questions to the station and make comments.

Students should go on a scavenger hunt to find items or data that demonstrate how women were treated unequally in the workplace during the nineteenth and early twentieth century.

Have students research the Arizona Governing Committee case. Have students compare the arguments they raised for both sides with the arguments presented by the justices

Ask students to determine the significance of the Frontiero and the Arizona Governing Committee’s decisions in the struggle for women’s equality. Based on research from a variety of sources, including TV, radio, the Internet, magazines etc. have students determine the areas of inequality between men and women in the workplace that still exist despite the decisions reached in Frontiero and Arizona Governing Committee.

Handout 4A: EQUAL PROTECTION: GENDER

Writing Legal Briefs: Frontiero v. Richardson (1973)

Your teacher will assign you the role of an attorney for one of the two sides in the Frontiero v. Richardson case, described below. Read the facts of Frontiero v. Richardson and then complete the exercise that follows.

Facts: Sharon Frontiero, a lieutenant, brought this suit against the Air Force. The Air Force, following federal law, awarded a salary supplement in the form of an extra housing allowance and extra medical benefits to every married male in the "uniformed services" of the United States. On the other hand, a married female in the military received the supplement only if she could prove that she paid more than half of her husband’s living costs. Frontiero who paid slightly less than half of her husband’s living costs, demanded the same supplement as males received, basing her arguments on the equal protection concept implied in the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause to support her case.

Exercise: The Frontiero case was reviewed and decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. In the space below, write a legal brief containing the arguments for your client. Your arguments should include the actions, values and legal basis related to the case. (Hint: the legal basis in this case related to the used the equal protection concept implied in the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause. Specifically, the attorneys argued over whether classification by gender should be considered "suspect" and, therefore, must pass the strict scrutiny test for it to be constitutional.)

___________________________________________________________________________

Handout 4B: EQUAL PROTECTION: GENDER

Arguments: Frontiero v. Richardson (1973)

Exercise: Read excerpts from the actual arguments presented by the attorneys in the Frontiero case. Identify the strongest and weakest arguments raised by both sides.

For Frontiero: Classifying people by gender or race, as this law does, is suspect. Therefore, the Court must examine such a law with strict scrutiny (special care) before allowing it to stand. Such classifications are suspect because sex, like race (1) is an accident of birth, which is generally irrelevant to the purpose of most laws, certainly the one in this case, (2) has long been the basis of discrimination in the U.S., (3) is a highly visible trait. In order for a law to pass the strict scrutiny test requires proof that the classification is "necessary for attaining a compelling government interest." There is no compelling government interest for awarding a salary supplement in the form of an extra housing allowance and extra medical benefits to every married male in the armed forces, while on the other hand providing the supplement to a married female in the military only if she could prove she paid more than half of her husband’s living costs.

For Richardson: One need only examine the facts as they are in American society today to agree with us. Clearly the facts indicate that wives in our society are frequently dependent upon their husbands, while husbands rarely are dependent on their wives. Thus in passing this law, Congress reasonably concluded that it would be both cheaper and easier simply conclusively to presume that wives of male members of the service are financially dependent on their husbands. Therefore, Congress quite correctly passed this law allowing male members to automatically qualify for the stipend, while burdening female members with the task of establishing dependency in fact.

Handout 4C: EQUAL PROTECTION: GENDER

Arizona Governing Committee v. Norris Cartoon

Read the cartoon below and complete the exercise on the following page

Exercise: After reading the cartoon above, complete the exercises below:

In the form of a question, state the constitutional issue raised in the case of the Arizona Governing Committee v. Norris.

______________________________________________________________________

List 2 arguments supporting the view of the Arizona Governing Committee, that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was not violated by the Arizona law that called for more money to be withheld from a female’s monthly retirement deduction than a male’s.

________________________________

List 2 arguments to support the view of Norris that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was violated by the Arizona law that called for more money to be withheld from a female’s monthly retirement deduction than a male’s.

________________________________