Reed v. Reed concerned gender classifications under the Fourteenth Amendment. Which statement is true?

Reed v. Reed concerned gender classifications under the Fourteenth Amendment. Which statement is true?

• A. Any arbitrary gender-based classification violates Equal Protection
• B. Gender classifications are inherently constitutional
• C. The equal protection clause does not apply to gender
• D. Only classifications affecting voting decisions are invalid

Answer: (A)

Reed v. Reed evaluates how the Equal Protection Clause applies to laws that distinguish on the basis of sex. The Court struck down a statute that gave automatic preference to men over women as administrators of estates, holding that the rule rests on gender stereotypes and has no substantial relation to achieving the law’s objective. In other words, sex-based classifications are unconstitutional when they are arbitrary or rely on overbroad generalizations about the sexes. That’s why the statement that any arbitrary gender-based classification violates Equal Protection best captures the holding of Reed: a statute that treats people differently solely because of gender and without a legitimate justification fails under the Fourteenth Amendment. The other statements misstate the landscape: gender classifications are not deemed inherently constitutional, the Equal Protection Clause does apply to gender distinctions, and the invalidity of classifications isn’t limited to cases involving voting.

Reed v. Reed evaluates how the Equal Protection Clause applies to laws that distinguish on the basis of sex. The Court struck down a statute that gave automatic preference to men over women as administrators of estates, holding that the rule rests on gender stereotypes and has no substantial relation to achieving the law’s objective. In other words, sex-based classifications are unconstitutional when they are arbitrary or rely on overbroad generalizations about the sexes. That’s why the statement that any arbitrary gender-based classification violates Equal Protection best captures the holding of Reed: a statute that treats people differently solely because of gender and without a legitimate justification fails under the Fourteenth Amendment.

The other statements misstate the landscape: gender classifications are not deemed inherently constitutional, the Equal Protection Clause does apply to gender distinctions, and the invalidity of classifications isn’t limited to cases involving voting.