Her opinion relied in part on a 1976 high court ruling that different government treatment of the genders, such as separate job benefits or minimum drinking ages, is permissible only if it meets an important public objective. That's a higher standard of review than is used in most discrimination cases, although not as strict as the one reserved for policies that treat people differently based on their race.
I don't suppose anyone knows what case they're referring to?
No comments:
Post a Comment