PROFILPELAJAR.COM

Orr v. Orr
Orr v. Orr
	Supreme Court of the United States
Argued November 27, 1978; Decided March 5, 1979
Full case name	William Orr v. Lillian Orr
Citations	440 U.S. 268 (more) 99 S. Ct. 1102; 59 L. Ed. 2d 306; 1979 U.S. LEXIS 65
Holding
	The Alabama statute granting alimony only to women violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Court membership
	Chief Justice Warren E. Burger Associate Justices William J. Brennan Jr. · Potter Stewart; Byron White · Thurgood Marshall; Harry Blackmun · Lewis F. Powell Jr.; William Rehnquist · John P. Stevens
Case opinions
Majority	Brennan, joined by Stewart, White, Marshall, Blackmun, Stevens
Concurrence	Blackmun
Concurrence	Stevens
Dissent	Powell
Dissent	Rehnquist, joined by Burger
Laws applied
	U.S. Const. amend. XIV

Orr v. Orr, 440 U.S. 268 (1979), was a United States Supreme Court case that held that Alabama statutes that imposed alimony obligations on husbands but not on wives was an unconstitutional equal protection violation.^[1]

Background

The state of Alabama had adopted statutes that imposed alimony obligations on husbands but not on wives for the stated purpose of addressing the economic disparity between men and women by providing support for needy women after divorce.^[1]

Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Margaret Moses Young filed a brief for the American Civil Liberties Union as amicus curiae urging reversal.

Opinion of the Court

Applying intermediate scrutiny, the Court determined that the statute was not substantially related to the stated purpose. The Court observed that a gender neutral statute would still have the effect of providing for needy women. The Court further observed that the only difference created by the Alabama statute was to also provide support for well off women that did not need support, and to exclude needy men from support.^[2]

References

^ ^a ^b Jonathan D. Varat; William Cohen; Vikram Amar (2009). Constitutional Law Cases and Materials (Concise Thirteenth ed.). New York: Foundation Press. p. 580.
^ Varat, p. 581