NCJ Number
14911
Journal
Southern California Law Review Volume: 47 Issue: 4 Dated: (AUGUST 1974) Pages: 1453-1490
Date Published
1974
Length
38 pages
Annotation
THESIS THAT A STATE WHICH OFFERS WORK RELEASE PROGRAMS TO ITS MALE INMATES IS CONSTITUTIONALLY REQUIRED TO OFFER EQUIVALENT PROGRAMS TO SIMILARLY SITUATED WOMEN PRISONERS.
Abstract
THE AUTHOR CONTENDS THAT FAILURE TO OFFER WORK RELEASE PROGRAMS TO WOMEN PRISONERS IS A SEX-BASED CLASSIFICATION WHICH CAN NOT STAND UNDER THE RATIONAL BASIS TEST AS MODIFIED BY THE 1971 CASE OF REED V. REED OR UNDER THE COMPELLING STATE INTEREST TEST. IN REED V. REED, THE COURT REJECTED ADMINISTRATIVE CONVENIENCE AS JUSTIFICATION FOR SEX-BASED CLASSIFICATIONS AND REFUSED TO ALLOW THE STATES TO BASE THEIR CLASSIFICATIONS UPON UNPROVEN ASSUMPTIONS CONCERNING DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE SEXES. THE NATURE OF WORK RELEASE PROGRAMS AND THEIR AVAILABILITY TO WOMEN IS DISCUSSED. TWO STANDARDS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW OF STATE ACTION - RESTRAINED REVIEW AND ACTIVE REVIEW - ARE ALSO EXAMINED. UNDER THE RESTRAINED STANDARD OF REVIEW, THE COURT SCRUTINIZES A STATUTE ONLY TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE DISTINCTIONS IT ESTABLISHES ARE RATIONALLY RELATED TO THE PURPOSES OF THE STATUTE. A LONG LINE OF DECISIONS UPHOLDING SEX-BASED CLASSIFICATIONS ARE CITED TO ILLUSTRATE THE JUDICIAL DEFERENCE TO STATE ACTION USING THIS RATIONAL BASIS TEST. UNDER THE ACTIVE STANDARD OF REVIEW, THE COURT USES STRICT SCRUTINY WHEN GROUPS CHARACTERIZED AS 'SUSPECT CLASSIFICATIONS' ARE INVOLVED, AS WELL AS INTERESTS THE COURTS RECOGNIZE AS 'FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS'. JUDICIAL DECISIONS INDICATING A TREND TOWARD TREATING SEX AS A SUSPECT CLASSIFICATION ARE CITED. IN ADDITION, THE MOST COMMON REASONS CITED FOR UNDER- AND NON-INCLUSION OF WOMEN IN WORK RELEASE PROGRAMS - ADDED EXPENSE, LESS NEED FOR REHABILITATION, ADMINISTRATIVE INCONVENIENCE - ARE ALL EXAMINED AND REFUTED BY THE AUTHOR.