Citation network
Weinberger Vs. Wiesenfeld
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Mar 19, 1975
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 636 (1975) U.S. Supreme Court Weinberger v. WiesenfeldSearch
-
U.S. 636 (1975) Weinberger v. WiesenfeldSearch
-
families' support, while female workers' earnings do not significantly contribute to families' support. Frontiero v. RichardsonSearch
-
g) is indistinguishable from that invalidated in Frontiero v. PageSearch
-
held that the statutory scheme violated the right to equal protection secured by the Fifth Amendment. Schlesinger v. BallardSearch
-
women to be the primary supporters of their spouses and children is not entirely without empirical support. See Kahn v. ShevinSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
the equal protection guarantee. A Appellant relies for the first proposition primarily on Flemming v. NestorSearch
-
difficulties which still confront women who seek to support themselves and their families. The Court held in Kahn v. ShevinSearch
-
can survive an equal protection attack. See also Schlesinger v. BallardSearch
-
Bolling v. SharpeSearch
-
always been precisely the same as to equal protection claims under the Fourteenth Amendment. See, e.g., Schlesinger v. BallardSearch
-
g)), is a bar to this action. See Public Utilities Comm'n of California v. UnitedSearch
-
Griffin v. RichardsonSearch
-
St. Paul Mercury Idemnity Co. v. RedSearch
-
of complete dependency of wives upon husbands has little relationship to present reality. In the same vein, Taylor v. LouisianaSearch
-
and its history demonstrates that the asserted purpose could not have been a goal of the legislation. See Eisenstadt v. BairdSearch
-
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture v. MorenoSearch
-
for the protection of the family. Although it lacks the contractual attributes of insurance or an annuity, Flemming v. NestorSearch
-
the statute's purported discrimination against female workers violates the Fifth Amendment as applied in Frontiero v. RichardsonSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Weinberger v. WiesenfeldSearch
-
Frontiero v. PageSearch
-
the Fifth Amendment. Schlesinger v. BallardSearch
-
See Kahn v. ShevinSearch
-
See Public Utilities Comm'n of California v. UnitedSearch
-
Taylor v. LouisianaSearch
-
See Eisenstadt v. BairdSearch
-
Schneider v. RuskSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial