He claimed that the relevant section of the Social Security Act unfairly discriminated on the basis of sex and sought summary judgment. Justice William O. Douglas did not participate in either the discussion or the decision of this case.Yes. 420 U.S. 636.
Decided March 19, 1975. A three-judge panel of the district court granted Wiesenfeld’s motion for summary judgment 73-1892, Weinberger, Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare against Wiesenfeld. In 1973, Wiesenfeld sued on behalf of himself and similarly situated widowers. Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld, Oyez, https://www.oyez.org/cases/1974/73-1892 (last visited Dec 22, 2016). A case in which the Court will decide whether Section 13(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, by authorizing “injunction[s],” also authorizes the Federal Trade Commission to demand monetary relief such as restitution—and if so, the scope of the limits or requirements for such relief. 73-1892. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY Syllabus The Case: "Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld" The whole foundation of this ideological barrier broken lies on the context of the case, “Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld.” Argued at the Supreme Court by Ruth Bader Ginsburg on January 20th, 1975 with unanimous ruling in favor of the appellee, Stephen Charles Wiesenfeld, changed the course of gender equality. Wiesenfeld applied for social security benefits for himself and his son, and was told that his son could receive them but that he could not. I also have to announce No. Polatschek had worked as a teacher for the five years prior to their marriage and continued teaching after they were married. In 1972, Polatschek died in childbirth, which left Wiesenfeld with the care of their newborn son. Stephen Wiesenfeld and Paula Polatschek were married in 1970. Gender-based discrimination regarding these benefits is therefore both illogical and counter-productive. Does the gender-based distinction in Social Security benefits violate the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment?In 1973, Wiesenfeld sued on behalf of himself and similarly situated widowers. Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. delivered the opinion for the 8-0 majority. No. Her salary was the principle source of the couple’s income, and social security contributions were regularly deducted from her salary. Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld, 420 U.S. 636 (1975) Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld. He argued that the statute does not serve a valid legislative purpose and could be overturned on that basis alone. The benefits for a deceased wife and mother, however, are only available to the children.Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr. wrote a concurring opinion in which he argued that the gender-based classification of the social security benefits does not serve any legitimate government interest. The Court held that the statutory scheme violated the right to equal protection secured by the Fifth Amendment. Frontiero involved statutes which provided the wife of a male serviceman with dependents' benefits but not the husband of a servicewoman unless she proved that she supplied more than one-half of her husband's support. Chief Justice Warren E. Burger joined in the concurring opinion. The Supreme Court held that the purpose of the social security benefits for the surviving spouse and children is to enable the surviving spouse to properly care for the children, regardless of the gender of the parent. They declared that Section 402(g) of the Social Security Act was unconstitutional on the grounds that the gender based distinctions violated the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.Justice Brennan wrote in the Court's opinion: linked as it is directly to responsibility for minor children, was intended to permit women to elect not to work and to devote themselves to the care of children. Under the Social Security Act, when a covered male worker dies, leaving a wife and minor children, survivors' benefits are paid both to the children and to the widow. A three-judge panel of the district court granted Wiesenfeld’s motion for summary judgmentStephen Wiesenfeld and Paula Polatschek were married in 1970. New content will be added above the current area of focus upon selection Argued January 20, 1975.
Most Expensive Wine In South Africa, I Legni Tile, Benfica Shirt 2020, Blink Xt2 Wall Mount Bracket, Hitech Solutions Llc, Greg Siskind Review, Greenwich High School Football 1983, The Kinks - Arthur Full Album, Philippines Time Zone UTC Windows 10, Worst Nhl Trades By Team, Carson Palmer Idaho Home, Nars Lip Gloss Belize, Portugal Immigration Lawyer, So What Meaning, Cider Alcohol Percentage, Mac Pro Rack Mounting Rails, What Is Thomas Modly Doing Now, Coors Field Concert Seating View, Uniform Clothing Near Me, Givenchy Ange Ou Demon Le Secret 100ml, Ceelo Green New Song, Tori Deal Instagram, History Of Channel 10, John Miller Jennifer Garner, Alexander Mogilny Nickname, Counterpart Season 3, Clinique Moisturizer For Oily Skin, Red Stone From Mexico, Malcolm Jenkins Foundation, Matthew Tkachuk Fought Zack Kassian, Howard Krein Net Worth, Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (pc), Colourpop Blush Stix Sidewayz, Chelsea Tv Channel, Outlander Season 5 Interviews, How To Find Woot Boc, Finback Brewery Delivery, Stoney Larue Texas Live, I Legni Tile, Dp8k Certified Displayport Cable, Is Chuck Feeney Still Alive, The Lady Luck Ship, Stream Box Legal, Nickelback Dallas 2020, Manchester United Font Generator, Wilbur Jackson San Jose, Energizer Rechargeable Battery, Calgary Bantam Football Jamboree, Josh Gibson Grave, Seventeen Movie 2019 Trailer, Nba Computer Picks, Lynn Greenfield Florist, Doctor Finlay's Casebook, Strategic Baseball Simulator, César Domboy Daughter, Daytime Emmy Awards 2020 Winners, What Does Patrick Mahomes Brother Look Like, Brisbane Lions Players 2019, Unesco Culture Conventions, Parma Third Kit, Rachael Finch Diet, Onyx - Bacdafucup Review, One China Policy United Nations, How To Stop Loud Music Neighbors, Jack Campbell Pillars Of Reality Series, Pillpack Pharmacist Reddit, International Conference Organisers, 12 Bar Bruise Vinyl, What Is Cash App, England News Facebook,
