In the case of Reed v. Reed from 1971, how did the U.S. Supreme Court curb gender discrimination?
A.by arguing for women’s right to privacy in their own healthcare decisions
B.by urging the Senate and House of Representatives to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment
C.by ruling out arbitrary gender classifications with the equal protections clause
D.by mandating gender-based affirmative action policies in the public sector
Sorry, I couldn't help but crack a clownish joke about this serious topic. But let me give you a straight answer!
In the case of Reed v. Reed, the U.S. Supreme Court curbed gender discrimination by option C, ruling out arbitrary gender classifications with the equal protections clause. They said, "Hey, no more treating people differently just because of their gender!" It was a step towards a fairer and more equal society.
The correct answer is C. In the case of Reed v. Reed in 1971, the U.S. Supreme Court curbed gender discrimination by ruling out arbitrary gender classifications with the equal protections clause. In this landmark case, the Court held that it is a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause to discriminate on the basis of gender. This decision established a precedent that gender-based classifications should be subject to intermediate scrutiny and cannot be based on the mere generalization about the roles and abilities of males and females.
The correct answer is C. In the case of Reed v. Reed (1971), the U.S. Supreme Court curbed gender discrimination by ruling out arbitrary gender classifications with the equal protections clause.
To arrive at this answer, one needs to have a basic understanding of the case and the legal concept behind curbing gender discrimination. Here's how you can approach finding the answer:
1. Understand the case: Reed v. Reed was a landmark Supreme Court case in 1971 involving gender discrimination. The case dealt with a provision in the Idaho probate code that preferred male individuals over female individuals in the appointment of administrators for an estate. It centered on the question of whether this arbitrary gender classification violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
2. Analyze the options:
- Option A: Arguing for women's right to privacy in their own healthcare decisions is unrelated to the case of Reed v. Reed and not relevant to curbing gender discrimination.
- Option B: Urging the Senate and House of Representatives to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment is a broader measure in promoting gender equality but not specific to the ruling in Reed v. Reed.
- Option C: Ruling out arbitrary gender classifications with the equal protections clause aligns with the central issue in Reed v. Reed, as the court deemed the gender classification in the Idaho probate code to be a violation of the equal protection rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment.
- Option D: Mandating gender-based affirmative action policies in the public sector is not related to Reed v. Reed. Affirmative action is a separate policy measure aimed at addressing historical disadvantages faced by certain groups and is not directly linked to curbing gender discrimination as argued in that case.
3. Determine the correct answer: Based on the analysis, it becomes evident that option C, ruling out arbitrary gender classifications with the equal protections clause, is the correct answer as it aligns directly with the Supreme Court's decision in Reed v. Reed. The court's ruling established that arbitrary gender classifications violated the constitutional guarantee of equal protection, thus curbing gender discrimination.
By following this methodical approach, you can arrive at the correct answer by eliminating irrelevant options and focusing on the central issue of the case.