Craig v. Boren
Citation and Court
429 U.S. 190 (1976). United States Supreme Court. Justice Brennan, writing for the Court.
Facts
An Oklahoma statute prohibited the sale of 3.2% beer to males under 21 years old but permitted females 18 and older to purchase it. Oklahoma justified the gender distinction on traffic safety grounds, citing statistics showing that young men were arrested for drunk driving at significantly higher rates than young women. Curtis Craig, a male between 18 and 21, and Carolyn Whitener, a beer vendor, challenged the law as a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Issue
Does a gender-based classification in an Oklahoma statute permitting women but not men of the same age to purchase low-alcohol beer violate the Equal Protection Clause?
Holding
Yes. The Oklahoma statute violated the Equal Protection Clause because the state’s statistical evidence of increased male drunk-driving arrests did not establish a sufficiently substantial relationship to the law’s gender classification.
Rule / Doctrine
Intermediate Scrutiny for Sex-Based Classifications: Government classifications based on sex must be substantially related to an important government interest. This standard — between rational basis and strict scrutiny — was formally established by this case and applies to all gender-based distinctions. Statistical generalizations about one sex, even if accurate at the aggregate level, are insufficient to justify penalizing all members of that sex.
Significance
Craig v. Boren is the foundational case establishing intermediate scrutiny as the standard of review for sex-based equal protection claims. Before this decision, the Court had applied varying standards in gender discrimination cases. The ruling represents a major step toward gender equality under constitutional law and has governed sex-discrimination cases ever since, later reinforced and arguably tightened in United States v. Virginia (VMI case), which required an “exceedingly persuasive justification.”