equalprote

rtf

School

Florida Homeschooling *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

101

Subject

Political Science

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

rtf

Pages

2

Uploaded by PresidentJackalMaster674

Report
CIVIL RIGHTS FRQ—OPTION 2 Summary: United States v. Virginia (1996) The Virginia Military Institute (VMI) boasted a long and proud tradition as Virginia's only exclusively male public undergraduate higher learning institution. The United States sued Virginia and VMI alleging that the school's male-only admissions policy was unconstitutional. On appeal from a District Court ruling favoring VMI, the Fourth Circuit reversed. It found VMI's admissions policy to be unconstitutional. Virginia, in response to the Fourth Circuit's reversal, proposed to create the Virginia Women's Institute for Leadership (VWIL) as a parallel program for women. On appeal from the District Court's affirmation of the plan, the Fourth Circuit ruled that despite the difference in prestige between the VMI and VWIL, the two programs would offer "substantively comparable" educational benefits. The United States appealed to the Supreme Court. The Court held that VMI's male-only admissions policy was unconstitutional because it failed to show "exceedingly persuasive justification" for VMI's gender-biased admissions policy. Virginia failed to support its claim that single-sex education contributes to educational diversity because it did not show that VMI's male-only admissions policy was created or maintained in order to further educational diversity. Furthermore, Virginia's VWIL could not offer women the same benefits as VMI offered men. The VWIL would not provide women with the same rigorous military training, faculty, courses, facilities, financial opportunities, or alumni reputation and connections that VMI affords its male cadets. Source: Oyez, United States v. Virginia a. Identify the constitutional provision that is common in both United States v. Virginia (1996) and Brown v. Board of Education (I) (1954). b. Based on the constitutional provision provided in part (A), explain how the decision in Brown v. Board of Education (I) (1954) compares to the decision in United States v. Virginia (1996). c. Explain how voters who disagree with the holding in United States v. Virginia (1996) could act to limit its impact. a. The constitutional provision that appears in both cases is the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, that deals with issues of equal treatment with no discrimination on basis of things like sex, race, or gender.
b. Both case decisions are comparable in that they both ruled in favor of a less segregation that derives from the Equal Protection Clause. In Brown, the Court ruled in favor of desegregation of schools, while in Virginia, the Court ruled that the policy of the male-only admissions of the college violated Equal Protection of the Fourteenth Amendment, making both of the decisions ones that increased equal rights. c. Voters who disagree with the holding in United States v Virginia could use various methods to limits its impact. First they could petition the Supreme Court to rehear the case, however they would need to provide a strong argument for why they disagree with the decision. If they failed in this endeavor they could also limit its impact by advocating for new legislation that limit the impacts of the case.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help