Orr v. Orr

SCOTUS - 1979

Facts:

• AL's alimony statute provide that husbands but not wives may be required to pay alimony upon divorce.

Procedural History:

• SCOTUS held unconstitutional.

Issues:

• Are gender classifications based upon sex-role stereotypes permissible under the Equal Protection Clause?

Holding/Rule:

• Gender classifications based upon sex-role stereotypes are not permissible under the Equal Protection Clause. 

Reasoning:

• The purported purpose is to provide help for needy spouses, using sex as a proxy for need.
• This is an important gov't objective.

• However, the classification at issue is not substantially related to the achievement of this purpose.
• There is no need to use sex as a proxy for need since the need of the spouses is considered in the divorce proceedings.
• The individualized hearings can determine who has need and determine alimony based upon that, not sex.
• Thus, the state's purpose can be served by a gender neutral classification.

• It seems that the statute announces that AL believes that wives should play a dependent role in the family dynamic.
• The gender role stereotype being perpetuated is in contradiction with equal protection.  

Dissent:

• None.

Notes:

• Gender-role stereotype, found unconstitutional.