Us V. 518 Us Vs Virginia Case Study

I. United States v. Virginia
II. 518 U.S. 515 (1996)
III. Facts: Virginia Military Institute (VMI) is a public institution that historically excluded women from admission. Their approach is based on “adversative” instruction with the aim of producing citizen-soldiers. Their admission policy would come into question, and in response to a US Court of Appeals ruling, the institute set up a separate female-only school – Virginia Women’s Institute for Leadership, or VWIL. However, VWIL’s instruction and curricula differed from those of VMI’s. The US Attorney General appealed to the Supreme Court.
IV. Issues: (1) Is VMI’s admission policy of excluding female prospective applicants exempt from 14th Amendment’s equal-protection due to their goals and methods of instruction? (2) Does the establishment of a separate, female-only institution provide an adequate alternative?
V. Decision and Action: (1) No. (2) No. It is so ordered.
VI. Reasoning: Per Ginsberg. VMI fails to offer requisite “exceedingly persuasive justification” for sex-based segregation. They argue that their unique method of instruction cannot be designed to include women and remain effective. The Court notes that gender segregation is not at all a novel approach, but one that had been common among the Commonwealth

Concurring Opinion: Per Rehnquist. Rehnquist concurs with the decision, but not the analysis. VMI argued for its policy by saying that diversity of school institution types – coed and unisex – should exist. This is an acceptable argument, the only issue is that there was not a proportionate representation of female-only institutions to make up for those like VMI. VWIL was a valid remedial solution, despite what the majority may suggest, had it truly provide a comparable experience. The claim that single-sex education has benefits to some students is a valid one, too, but there is no proof that the adversative method can only work in a male-only