Reed v. Reed
Reed v. Reed is a landmark Supreme Court case that addressed gender discrimination in probate law. The case arose after the death of Richard Reed, resulting in a dispute between his separated parents, Cecil and Sally Reed, over the administration of his estate. Under Idaho law, a mandatory preference was given to fathers over mothers in such cases, which Sally Reed challenged as unconstitutional. The Supreme Court unanimously ruled in her favor, stating that laws must not be arbitrary and should have a substantial relation to their intended purpose. Chief Justice Warren E. Burger emphasized that there was no rational basis for assuming that men were inherently more qualified than women to handle such matters. This decision marked a significant step in recognizing gender equality under the law, although it did not classify sex as a suspect classification, leaving states with considerable leeway in gender-related laws. Reed v. Reed set the stage for future cases that would require a more stringent scrutiny of gender discrimination.
Reed v. Reed
Date: November 22, 1971
Citation: 404 U.S. 71
Issue: Sex discrimination
Significance: A landmark case marking the first time that the Supreme Court applied the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to strike down a statute because of gender discrimination.
When Richard Reed died, both of his separated parents, Cecil Reed and Sally Reed, petitioned the probate court to administer the estate. The Idaho code required the court to give mandatory preference to the father, without any consideration of the relative capabilities of the applicants. Sally Reed argued that the mandatory preference was unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court, by a 7-0 vote, agreed with her contention. Writing for the Court, Chief Justice Warren E. Burger insisted that any classifications of people must not be arbitrary and must have “a fair and substantial relation to the object of the legislation.” Because there was no rational basis to think that men were always more qualified than women to administer wills, the probate judge must hold a hearing to determine the relative merits of the two petitioners. Burger refused to consider whether sex might be a suspect classification, and his endorsement of the rational basis test allowed states considerable discretion in making gender distinctions. In later cases, including Craig v. Boren (1976), the Court adopted a more demanding test requiring a heightened level of scrutiny.