Craig v. Boren 
Author: Lindsey

Facts

Oklahoma law prohibits sale of “nonintoxicating” beer to males under 21 and to females under 18.   

Issue

Does the law violate the EPC because it distinguishes between men and women unfairly? 

Holding

Yes, the law is invalid. 

Reasoning

The gender classification must serve important government objectives and must be substantially related to the achievement of those objectives.   

Judgment

The objective stated was to enhance traffic safety.  This is important, but the law isn’t substantially related to that goal.

1. 1. There is only a 2% statistical correlation between maleness and drunk driving.  Not a tight enough fit.
   2. The law says that men can drink the beer, but they just can’t buy it.  This doesn’t relate to the supposed object of the law. 

Comments

• • • Powell concur:  Reed should be read more narrowly.  It says that gender-based classifications are subject to some level of judicial scrutiny in-between RR and SS. 
    • Stevens concur:  It is difficult to believe that the statute intended to cope with the problem of traffic safety since it (1) doesn’t restrict consumption, (2) its not even a very intoxicating beer. 
    • Rehnquist dissent:  The RR test should apply.  Only use SS if there is discrimination against women.  The statistical analysis passes the requirements for the RR test.