In Reed v. Reed, the Supreme Court ruled that

In Reed v. Reed, the Supreme Court ruled that

• A. sex discrimination violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution.
• B. general discrimination can be justified only if it serves "important governmental objectives" and is "substantially related to those objectives."
• C. Congress can draft men without drafting women.
• D. states may not finance an all-male military school.

Answer: (A)

This question tests how the Equal Protection Clause treats sex-based classifications. In Reed v. Reed, the Supreme Court ruled that Idaho’s law giving a man preference to be the administrator of an deceased person’s estate violated equal protection because it treated people differently solely because of their sex, and there was no legitimate justification for that discrimination. This was a landmark decision, as it was the first time the Court struck down a law on the basis of gender discrimination, signaling that sex-based distinctions must have a justified objective and are subject to heightened scrutiny. The other choices address different constitutional issues that aren’t at stake in this case.

This question tests how the Equal Protection Clause treats sex-based classifications. In Reed v. Reed, the Supreme Court ruled that Idaho’s law giving a man preference to be the administrator of an deceased person’s estate violated equal protection because it treated people differently solely because of their sex, and there was no legitimate justification for that discrimination. This was a landmark decision, as it was the first time the Court struck down a law on the basis of gender discrimination, signaling that sex-based distinctions must have a justified objective and are subject to heightened scrutiny. The other choices address different constitutional issues that aren’t at stake in this case.