Goesaert v. Cleary

SCOTUSCase
Litigants=Goesaert v. Cleary
ArgueDate=November 19
ArgueYear=1948
DecideDate=December 20
DecideYear=1948
FullName=Valentine Goesaert et al. v. Owen J. Cleary et al.
USVol=335
USPage=464
Citation=69 S.Ct. 198, 93 L.Ed. 163
Prior=74 F. Supp. 735 (E.D. Mich. 1947), "probable jurisdiction noted", 68 S. Ct. 1340 (1948).
Subsequent=
Holding=A state law prohibiting a woman from working as a bartender unless she was the wife or daughter of the bar owner did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
SCOTUS=1946-1949
Majority=Frankfurter
JoinMajority=Vinson, Black, Reed, Jackson, Burton
Dissent=Rutledge
JoinDissent=Douglas, Murphy
LawsApplied=U.S. Const. amend. XIV, Mich. Stat. Ann. § 18990(1).

"Goesaert v. Cleary", 335 U.S. 464 (1948), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld a Michigan law which prohibited women from being employed as bartenders unless their father or husband owned the establishment. Craig v. Boren, [http://www.enfacto.com/case/U.S./429/190/ 429 U.S. 190 (1976)] subsequently overruled "Goesaert".

ee also

*List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 335
*Craig v. Boren, [http://www.enfacto.com/case/U.S./429/190/ 429 U.S. 190 (1976)]

Further reading

*cite journal |last=Berkheimer |first=R. L. |authorlink= |coauthors= |year=1948 |month= |title=Equal Protection of the Laws—Statute Forbidding Women to Work as Bartenders |journal=Nebraska Law Review |volume=28 |issue= |pages=622 |issn=00479209 |url= |accessdate= |quote=
*cite book |title=I dissent: Great Opposing Opinions in Landmark Supreme Court Cases |last=Tushnet |first=Mark |authorlink= |coauthors= |year=2008 |publisher=Beacon Press |location=Boston |isbn=9780807000366 |pages=127–132

External links

* [http://www.enfacto.com/case/U.S./335/464/ Goesaert v. Cleary, 335 U.S. 464 (1948)] (opinion full text).