Hoyt v. Florida

The Court held that schools can provide separate girls' and boys' sports teams defined by biological sex.

The Court held that a Tennessee state law banning puberty blockers and hormone therapy for the treatment of gender dysphoria in minors did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

In a 6–3 decision, the Court ruled in favor of a website designer, ruling that the state of Colorado cannot compel the designer to create work that violates her values.

The Court held that the City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania violated First Amendment rights of a Catholic foster care agency by refusing to renew the agency's contract unless it agreed to certify married same-sex couples as foster parents.

The Court, in a case over a bakery's refusal to make a custom wedding cake for a gay couple, ruled that the Commission showed hostility toward the owner's religious objections, violated his free exercise rights, and reversed its decision.· AI-written

The United States Supreme Court held that parents could sue a school committee under grounds of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

The Court upheld the validity of laws relating to U.S. citizenship at birth for children born outside the United States, out of wedlock, to an American parent.

In a 5–4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that opposition to homosexuality is part of BSA's "expressive message" and that allowing homosexuals as adult leaders would interfere with that message.

In a 5-to-4 decision on May 24, 1999, the Supreme Court reversed the dismissal that the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit decided on when Aurelia Davis first petitioned for her daughter.

The Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the NCAA's receipt of dues payments from colleges and universities which received federal funds, was not sufficient to subject the NCAA to a lawsuit under Title IX.

In a case about a teacher's sexual harassment of a student, the Court held that a school district may be liable, but damages under Title IX require that an official with authority had actual knowledge and was deliberately indifferent.· AI-written

The Supreme Court of the United States struck down the long-standing male-only admission policy of the Virginia Military Institute (VMI) in a 7–1 decision.

The Court held that peremptory challenges based solely on a prospective juror's sex are unconstitutional.

The United States Supreme Court held that Title IX, which applies only to colleges and universities that receive federal funds, could be applied to a private school that refused direct federal funding but for which a large number of students had received federally funded scholarships.

The court held that the mere existence of a biological link between an unwed father and a child does not merit protection under the Due Process Clause regarding adoption; the unwed father must earn rights under that clause by coming forward and contributing to the child's development.

The Court ruled that the single-sex admissions policy of the Mississippi University for Women violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The Court held that the practice of requiring only men to register for the draft was constitutional.

In a challenge to a statutory rape law as gender discrimination, the Court ruled that the gender distinction passed intermediate scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause because it served an important state goal, and found the law justified.· AI-written

The Court held a Louisiana Head and Master law, which gave sole control of marital property to the husband and indicated the husband's dominance over the wife in the marriage, unconstitutional.

The Court held that a New York law, which allowed unwed mothers, but not unwed fathers, a veto over the adoption of that couple's children, was discriminatory, and violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The Court upheld a Georgia law that barred fathers of illegitimate children from bringing wrongful death claims without imposing the same burden on mothers.· AI-written

The Court held that Alabama statutes imposing alimony obligations on husbands but not on wives violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.· AI-written

The court held that an absentee and unwed father has no substantive due process right to intervene in an adoption of the child.

The Court held that a Social Security provision requiring widowers, but not widows, to have received at least half their support from the deceased spouse was invidious discrimination against female wage earners and violated Fifth Amendment due process.· AI-written

The Court ruled that statutory or administrative sex classifications were subject to intermediate scrutiny under the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.· AI-written

The Court struck down Utah's definitions of adulthood as a violation of the Equal Protection Clause: women reached adulthood at 18; men at 21.

The Court unanimously held that a Social Security Act provision letting widows but not widowers collect special benefits while caring for minor children violated the equal protection right secured by the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause.· AI-written

The Court held that systematically excluding women from a venire, or jury pool, by requiring (only) them to actively register for jury duty violated the defendant's right to a representative venire.

The Court upheld a federal statute granting female Naval officers four more years of commissioned service before mandatory discharge than male Naval officers.

The Court held that granting widows a bonus property tax exemption not available to widowers does not violate the Equal Protection Clause because it has a "fair and substantial relation to the object of the legislation."

The Court decided that benefits given by the United States military to the family of service members cannot be given out differently because of sex.

The Court held that the fathers of children born out of wedlock had a fundamental right to their children.

The Court held that the administrators of estates cannot be named in a way that discriminates between sexes.