Reed v. Reed, 404 U.S. 71 (1971), was an Equal Protection case in the United States in which the Supreme Court ruled that the administrators of estates cannot be named in a way that discriminates between sexes. Encyclopedia.com. The Court did so with Reed v. Reed in 1971.

Learn vocabulary, terms, and more with flashcards, games, and other study tools. Raised in Prosperous Home

His adoptive parents, who had separated sometime prior to his death, are the parties to this appeal. L…, Harry Blackmun Reed v. Reed was the first ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court that concluded laws arbitrarily requiring gender (based on the sex of the person) discrimination were violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. After the death of their adopted son Richard Lynn Reed,[1] Sally and Cecil Reed sought to be named the administrator of their son's estate; the Reeds were separated. Allen R. Derr argued the cause for appellant. MR. CHIEF JUSTICE BURGER delivered the opinion of the Court. Indeed, under § 15-312, a woman whose spouse dies intestate has a preference over a son, father, brother, or any other male relative of the decedent. ; (2) the children; (3) the father or mother. As editor of the highly respected Harvard Law Review, she gained the nickname "Ruthless Ruthie."

A windows (pop-into) of information (full-content of Sensagent) triggered by double-clicking any word on your webpage.

During her time at Columbia, she was also an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union where she founded the Women's Rights Project. . Choose the design that fits your site. Each filed a petition with the Probate Court of Ada County, Idaho, asking to be named. The parties now before the Court are not affected by the operation of § 15-312 in this respect, however, and appellant has made no challenge to that section. Encyclopedia.com gives you the ability to cite reference entries and articles according to common styles from the Modern Language Association (MLA), The Chicago Manual of Style, and the American Psychological Association (APA). With him on the briefs were Melvin L. Wulf, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Pauli Murray, and Dorothy Kenyon. Richard's adoptive parents, Sally and Cecil Reed, had earlier separated. Moving the Mountain: The Women's Movement in America Since 1960.

. Chief Lawyers for Appellant: Allen R. Derr, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Chief Lawyers for Appellee: Charles S. Stout, Myron E. Anderson, Justices for the Court: Hugo L. Black, Harry A. Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Jr., Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, William O. Douglas, John Marshall Harlan II, Thurgood Marshall, Potter Stewart, Byron R. White. Supreme Court justice

We note finally that, if § 15-314 is viewed merely as a modifying appendage to § 15-312 and as aimed at the same objective, its constitutionality is not thereby saved. [1] Prior to the date set for a hearing on the mother's petition, appellee Cecil Reed, the father of the decedent, filed a competing petition seeking to have himself appointed administrator of the son's estate. At 19, using his father's rifle, Richard killed himself. The Equal Protection Clause of that amendment does, however, deny to States the power to legislate that different treatment be accorded to persons placed by a statute into [p76] different classes on the basis of criteria wholly unrelated to the objective of that statute. In addition to being female, she was also Jewish and a mother. In a unanimous decision, the Court held that the law's dissimilar treatment of men and women was unconstitutional.

The trial court sustained the demurrers to the complaint on the ground it did not state a cause of action.

A proposed Equal Rights Amendment had been approved by the U.S. House of Representatives in August 1970 by a margin of greater than ten to one, 350–15, and again in October 1971 by a vote of 354–24. English thesaurus is mainly derived from The Integral Dictionary (TID). See United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996) (declaring that governmental gender-based government action must demonstrate exceedingly persuasive justification). . 404 U.S. at 76. This "turning point case," as Ruth Bader Ginsburg termed it, began with the suicide of a teenager, Richard Lynn Reed. Barbier v. Connolly, 113 U.S. 27 (1885); Lindsley v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co., 220 U.S. 61 (1911); Railway Express Agency v. New York, 336 U.S. 106 (1949); McDonald v. Board of Election Commissioners, 394 U.S. 802 (1969). Named to Supreme Court

The case had its beginning on March 29, 1967 in Ada County, Idaho when nineteen-year-old Richard Lynn Reed, using his father's rifle, committed suicide. Richard Lynn Reed, a minor, died intestate in Ada County, Idaho, on March 29, 1967. 93 Idaho 511, 465 P.2d 635. Encyclopedia.com. ○   Lettris The Reed Court claimed it was applying rational basis as the standard of review: "The question presented by this case, then, is whether a difference in the sex of competing applicants for letters of administration bears a rational relationship to a state objective that is sought to be advanced". ", Apparently, the probate judge considered himself bound by Section 15-314 to choose the male, Cecil, over the female, Sally, since the two were otherwise "equally entitled.". Although an accomplished scholar, when Ginsburg sought employment she ran into the traditional stereotyping (fixed impression) of female lawyers which limited opportunities in a male-dominated profession. Championing the rights of women, she argued six cases before the U.S. Supreme Court between 1973 and 1976 and won five of them. 3rd Edition. Approximately seven months after Richard's death, his mother, appellant Sally Reed, filed a petition in the Probate Court of Ada County, [p72] seeking appointment as administratrix of her son's estate. Supreme Court Drama: Cases That Changed America. This page was last edited on 18 December 2017, at 12:02. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.

Prior to 1971, laws in the United States regularly discriminated on the basis of sex. In 1960 a d…, Thurgood Marshall 1908–1993 . . For the first time in history, the Supreme Court ruled that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution applied to differential treatment based on legal sex. Significance. Reed v. Reed was the first ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court that concluded laws arbitrarily requiring gender (based on the sex of the person) discrimination were violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Reed v. Reed decision marked a historic moment in the fight for women's rights. The Encyclopedia of Women's History in America. Significance: This decision was the first time in the Fourteenth Amendment's 103-year history that the Supreme Court ruled that its Equal Protection Clause protected women's rights. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S. Ct. 705, 35 L. Ed. A minor, Richard Lynn Reed, … In 1971, for the first time, the Supreme Court invalidated a law that discriminated based on sex. We further note that, on March 12, 1971 the Idaho Legislature adopted the Uniform Probate Code, effective July 1, 1972.

The boy spent his "tender years" in the custody of his mother but was transferred into the custody of his father once he reached his teens. Lettris is a curious tetris-clone game where all the bricks have the same square shape but different content. Derr's team argued, as women's rights advocates had since the 1870s, that women's rights were protected under the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. ." ." "[3], This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. But it was Reed v. Reed, a 1971 case for which Ginsburg wrote the plaintiff’s brief, that relied on the 14th Amendment. By providing dissimilar treatment for men and women who are thus similarly situated, the challenged section violates the Equal Protection Clause. We note that § 15-312, set out in n. 2, supra, appears to give a superior entitlement to brothers of an intestate (class 4) than is given to sisters (class 5). The ruling formed the basis for protecting women's and men's rights in gender discrimination claims in many situations over the next thirty years. 264 U.S. at 294–295. To give a mandatory preference to members of either sex over members of the other, merely to accomplish the elimination of hearings .

The court concluded a cause of action could only be stated “if the subject property, by reason of the prior circumstances, were presently the object of community notoriety ․” (Original italics.) 5. The second Justice John Marshall Harlan (1899-1971) preached the virtues of judicial restraint and federalism as a persistent di…, https://www.encyclopedia.com/law/legal-and-political-magazines/reed-v-reed-1971. nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws," the U.S. Supreme Court refused for a century to apply this guarantee to women. Instead of elevating women to suspect classification by reviewing the law under a very restrictive standard known as strict scrutiny, the court subjected the Idaho statute using rational basis review. In stating this conclusion, the probate judge gave no indication that he had attempted to determine the relative capabilities of the competing applicants to perform the functions incident to the administration of an estate.

Sally's lawyer, Allen R. Derr, argued that Idaho's law violated Sally's constitutional rights of equal protection of the laws guaranteed in the Fourteenth Amendment. Reed v. Reed 1971Appellant: Sally ReedAppellee: Cecil ReedAppellant's Claim: That a Idaho law favoring the appointment of a man, merely because he was male, over a woman to be administrator of a deceased person's estate violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.Chief Lawyers for Appellant: Allen R. Derr, Ruth Bader Ginsburg Source for information on Reed v. Three years later, Reed was interpreted by a majorityas declaring gender a suspect classification subject to intermediate scrutiny.

It seems clear the probate judge considered himself bound by statute to give preference to the male candidate over the female, each being otherwise "equally entitled.". Shortly after Reed, in Frontiero v. Richardson, the Supreme Court declared that sex-based classification should be held to strict scrutiny; however there was no majority opinion and so the issue remained open. According to the Probate Code, Cecil was appointed administrator and Sally challenged the law in court. In a unanimous decision, the Court held that the law's dissimilar treatment of men and women was unconstitutional.