Craig v. Boren (1976)
Author: Bram

Relevant Facts: An OK statute prohibited beer sales to males under 21, and to women 18.  But males 18-20 could drink, provided they did not buy.  An 18-20 male sued for injunctive relief and lost.  This Court reverses.

Issue: Under constitutional law, is a statute that prohibits men from sale of alcohol until age 21 but only to women until age 18 violative of the EPC of the Constitution?

Holding: Yes.  The statute does not closely relate itself to those objectives established under Reed.

Court's Rationale/Reasoning: Under the Reed standard, all sex discrimination is subject to strict scrutiny.  The gov't used traffic safety as its objective underlying the statute.  Although this is an important reason, relating that to one gender is not congruent; it is difficult to show how it closely served the purpose.

The lower court applied rational basis scrutiny.

Statistical evidence is accurate but unpersuasive.  The percentages are negligible in terms of such a disparity which would condone enacting such a law.  The beer in relation to the statute fails to distinguish itself from regular alcohol.  The surveys themselves also do not distinguish between the male and female deaths in relation to beer consumption.

Rule: To pass strict scrutiny, classifications of gender must serve important gov't objectives and must be substantially related to the achievement of those objectives.

Important Dicta:  N/A.

Dissenting:  (Justice Rehnquist): Males are not particularly disadvantaged by this law.  EPC does not mention the substantially related test which the majority considered.  Objectives cannot be determined by the Court.  This is the job of a legislature: to understand the nature of its own business.

Concurring: (Justice Stevens): Would rather decide the constitutionality of laws based on the legislature's reason for motivating it to pass the law originally.  A statute with the intent to limit DUI-related deaths is compelling, but not when it limits those who are covered under the law (males 18-20).  The law also disparately treats males as compared to females.