Attorney General v. Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Ass'n

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that such a classification could not pass muster under the strict scrutiny required by the Massachusetts Equal Rights Amendment
• assuming that “separate but equal” treatment of males and females would be constitutionally permissible
• exclusion of boys from girls' teams prohibited under strict scrutiny mandated by state's equal rights amendment
• “[t]he parties agree, and we concur, that [the MIAA’s rules] must be viewed as ‘State action’ for legal purposes”
• rule prohibiting male participation on girls' sports teams held invalid under the Equal Rights Amendment
• any justification for classification proscribed by ERA, even under affirmative action, should be weighed very carefully

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).