preview

Forensic Science Camp

Decent Essays

Respondents have not proven that the means of discrimination used in the female-only Forensic Science Camp is substantially related to their alleged governmental interest.
To prove a substantial relationship, a state actor must show that “the classification serves important governmental objectives and that the discriminatory means employed are substantially related to the achievement of those objectives.” United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515, 516 (1996). To show a substantial relation, the justification for discrimination “must be genuine, not hypothesized . . . and it must not rely on overbroad generalizations about the different talents, capacities, or preferences of males and females.” Id. at 533.
In Virginia, a historic state military institute was criticized for not allowing females into a historically male university. The Court found that Virginia could not show a substantial correlation to any governmental interest. They said, “a tenable justification must …show more content…

They hold the girls-only camp responsible for higher retention rates (L.F. 33), bolstered confidence among female students (L.F. 32), and the continued success of its attendees after college (L.F. 25). However, there is once again no empirical evidence confirming this claim. For instance, Vera Ruben, the founder of the camp, says that women who attend the camp “seem to have more confidence than my other female students.” She goes on to say that, she “thinks” this is due solely to Forensic Science Camp.” (L.F. 33). At no point does she consider that there may be a correlation between confidence and students who attend, not women who are made more confident because of the camp. All evidence of a substantial relationship is word of

Get Access