This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Under Massachusetts law, all veterans who qualify for state civil service positions must be considered for appointment ahead of any qualifying nonveterans. This preference operates overwhelmingly in favor of males. Over 98% of the veterans in Massachusetts were male, and only 1.8% were female. Over 1/4th of the Massachusetts population were veterans. The District Court found that this absolute preference has a devastating impact upon the employment opportunities of women. It also found that the legislation had not been enacted for the purpose of discriminating against women, but that its exclusionary impact upon women was nonetheless so severe as to require the State to further its goals through a more limited form of preference. The court declared the current plan unconstitutional and enjoined its operation. The Supreme Court vacated the judgment and remanded the case for further consideration in light of Washington v. Davis. The Davis case held that a neutral law does not violate the Equal Protection Clause solely because it results in a racially disproportionate impact; instead, the disproportionate impact must be traced to a purpose to discriminate on the basis of race. The court reaffirmed its original judgment.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.