Do different tariffs for men's and women's gloves violate the Equal Protection Clause?

Volokh, Eugene VOLOKH at law.ucla.edu
Wed Feb 10 11:00:53 PST 2010


Totes-Isotoner Corp. v. United States (Fed. Cir. Feb. 5) (http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions/09-1113.pdf), says no, though one judge took a different approach from the other two.  Any thoughts on what the right analysis should be?

By the way, I take it that we'd agree that stores that specialize in men's clothes or in women's clothes shouldn't be seen as public accommodations that illegally discriminate based on sex (in those states whose public accommodations law cover retail stores) generally.  But should that be because this isn't really sex discrimination, or because the statutes ought to have, or ought to be read as having, an exception for such behavior?

Eugene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/conlawprof/attachments/20100210/e1b8f045/attachment.htm>


More information about the Conlawprof mailing list