Document: 430 U.S. 762 97 S.Ct. 1459 52 L.Ed.2d 31 Deta Mona TRIMBLE and Jessie Trimble, Appellants,v.Joseph Roosevelt GORDON et al. No. 75-5952. Argued Dec. 7, 1976. Decided April 26, 1977. Syllabus Section 12 of the Illinois Probate Act, which allows illegitimate children to inherit by intestate succession only from their mothers (though under law legitimate may both fathers), held violate Equal Protection Clause Fourteenth Amendment. Pp. 766-776. (a) A classification based on illegitimacy such as that challenged here is not "suspect" so require it survive "strict scrutiny," Mathews v. Lucas, 427 495, 506, 96 2755, 2763, 49 651. Nevertheless, this Court requires, "at a minimum, statutory bear some rational relationship state purpose," Weber Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 406 164, 172, 92 1400, 1405, 768, Court's previous decisions in area show standard "not toothless one." supra, U.S., at 510, S.Ct., 2764. P. 767. (b) cannot be justified ground promotes family relationships. State attempt influence actions men women imposing sanctions born 768-770. (c) Difficulties proving paternity situations do justify total disinheritance whose fathers die intestate. "carefully tuned alternative considerations," 513, 2766, illustrated fact instant case decedent had been determined appellant child's father state-court action. 770-773. (d) The appellant's could have provided for her making will does save § invalidity Clause. 773-774. (e) Though appellees contend should sustained theory represents legislature's mirror intent decedents, Supreme construing did rely upon presumed intent, own examination provision discloses no legislative intent; rather, indicated, 12's primary purpose was provide system more just than law, tempered secondary interest protecting against spurious claims. 774-776. Reversed remanded. James D. Weill, Chicago, Ill., appellants. Miles N. Beermann, appellees. Mr. Justice POWELL delivered opinion Court. 1 At issue constitutionality Act1 mothers. Under are allowed fathers.2 2 * Appellant Trimble daughter Trimble3 Sherman Gordon. Gordon lived Chicago with 1970 until died 1974, victim homicide. On January 2, 1973, Circuit Cook County, entered order finding ordering him pay $15 per week support.4 thereafter supported accordance openly acknowledged his child. He age 28, leaving an estate consisting 1974 Plymouth automobile worth approximately $2,500. 3 Shortly after Gordon's death, mother next friend Mona, filed petition letters administration, determination heirship, declaratory relief Division Ill. That court determining identifying heirs father, Joseph Gordon, mother, Ethel King, brother, two sisters, half brother.5 All these individuals appeal, but appellee King has brief. 4 excluded authority negative implications provides relevant part: 5 "An child heir any maternal ancestor, person whom might inherited, if living; lawful shall represent take, descent, parent would taken, living. who parents inter-marry father's legitimate."6 6 If child, she inherited entire law.7 In rejecting Mona's claim 12. 7 After notice appeal filed, allowing direct decision Court, bypassing Appellate Appellants were granted leave file amicus brief pending consolidated appeals presented similar challenges June 1975, handed down its re Estate Karas, 61 Ill.2d 40, 329 N.E.2d 234 (1975), sustaining all constitutional challenges, including those appellants' brief.8 September 24, oral argument case. Chief Underwood orally bench, affirming Karas. final judgment October 15, 1975.9 8 We noted probable jurisdiction consider arguments violates Amendment invidiously discriminating basis sex.10 424 964, 1457, 47 731 (1976). now reverse. As we conclude discrimination unconstitutional, reach sex argument. II 9 rejected equal protection challenge explicit Labine Vincent, 401 532, 91 1017, 28 288 (1971). found interests encouraging relationships establishing accurate efficient method disposing property death. also unobjectionable because "insurmountable barrier" prevented sharing estates fathers. By will, assured share estate. 10 Appellees endorse reasoning suggest additional justifications statute. weighing sufficiency justifications, guided our involving laws illegitimacy.11 "(T)his purpose." 768 (1972). context, stated minimum; sometimes requires more. "Though latitude given economic social regulation necessarily broad, when classifications approach sensitive fundamental personal rights, exercises stricter scrutiny . ." Ibid. 11 (1) urge us hold "suspect," must scrutiny." considered last Term 651 recognized analogous many respects characteristics suspect used differentiations. Id., 505, 2762. nevertheless concluded analogy sufficient "our most exacting 2763. Despite conclusion fall "realm less strictest Lucas establishes "is one," id., 2764, proposition clearly demonstrated area.12 III prefaced discussion served general Quoting earlier opinions, statute enacted ameliorate harsh common-law rule filius nullius incapable inheriting anyone. Ill.2d, 44-45, N.E.2d, 236-237. Although bring into parity children, improve position, thus partially achieving asserted objective. advanced remaining light motivating purpose. A. 13 (2) relied part State's purported "the promotion (legitimate) relationships." 48, 238. justification accepted Labine, contains perfunctory analysis. This inattention oversight, bears attenuated goal.13 14 like this, mere incantation proper No one disputes appropriateness Illinois' concern unit, perhaps institution society. flaw analysis lies elsewhere. said "depends character relation aims." 504, 2761. below address between relationships, incomplete. same observation can made about stand alone. subsequent decisions, expressly 15 examined Louisiana workmen's compensation discriminated class children. Without questioning Louisiana's "persons shun illicit relations offspring day reap benefits compensation." 173, 1405. distinguished other grounds, reasons equally applicable here: 16 "The status expressed through ages society's condemnation irresponsible liaisons beyond bonds marriage. But visiting head infant illogical unjust. Moreover, disabilities contrary basic concept legal burdens individual responsibility or wrongdoing. Obviously, responsible birth penalizing ineffectual well unjust way deterring parent." 175, 1406 (footnote omitted). 17 ability conform conduct societal norms, affect neither parents' nor status. B 18 (3) another substantial justification: "establish(ing) disposition." Here court's complete. Focusing specifically difficulty related danger claims, explained asymmetrical men. favorable treatment claiming mothers' "proof lineal readily ascertainable dealing ancestors." 52, 240. Alluding possibilities abuse, case-by-case claims alleged paternity. 52-53, 240-241. 19 serious problems demanding fathers' required either generally. think, however, gave inadequate consideration objective assuring accuracy efficiency disposition failed possibility middle extremes complete exclusion For least significant categories men, inheritance rights without jeopardizing orderly settlement dependability titles passing intestacy laws. Because excludes unnecessarily, constitutionally flawed. 20 (4) death appropriate framework, structuring matter particularly within competence States. exercising responsibility, enact governing procedure substance succession. Absent infringement right, federal courts role here, and, even violations alleged, accord deference scheme inheritance. 21 judicial task difficult vindicating interfering unduly area. Our demonstrate sensitivity lurking respect proof paternity," Gomez Perez, 409 535, 538, 93 872, 875, 35 56 (1973), need States draw "arbitrary lines facilitate potentially proof," Weber, 174, 1406. "Those lightly brushed aside, they impenetrable barrier works shield otherwise invidious discrimination." Gomez, 875. especially helpful guidance. 22 provisions Social Security Act eligibility surviving children's insurance benefits. One conditions dependency deceased wage earner. 498, n. 1, 2758. number prove actual dependency. upheld classifications, them "reasonably likelihood death." 509, Central "statute broadly discriminate legitimates illegitimates more, carefully considerations." 2766. 23 (5) present arises context different question whether considerations" here. meet standard. facts graphically illustrate defect action prior strength finding, he ordered contribute support adjudication establish right estate, compromised circumstances.14 extends purposes. See Jimenez Weinberger, 417 628, 637, 94 2496, 2502, 41 363 (1974). C 24 (6) decedents involved left parts writing will. cited significant. penultimate paragraph distinguishes Levy Louisiana, 391 68, 88 1509, 436 (1968),15 insurmountable "There slightest suggestion barred father." 539, 1021. then listed three steps resulted recovery Labine's daughter. will; legitimated marrying mother; stating acknowledgment desire her. distinction alternatives existed, involved. 170-171, 1404-1405. 25 appearance focus presence absence somewhat analytical anomaly. Here, treats differently Traditional asks differentiation objectives. analysis, clear how saved hypothetical circumstances. 26 focusing taken assure loses sight essential question: law. written devising longer involve all. Similarly, complying requirements legitimation, illegitimates. Hard questions avoided reshuffling facts. devised Reed Reed, 404 71, 251, 30 225 (1971), naming executor, problem preference male administrators intestates presented. gives indication available significance. think none D 27 (7) Finally, affirm 12, mirrors intentions citizens regarding Individualizing theory, argue assume knew failure make shows approval disposition. resolve alone ever illegitimates,16 careful examining history text omission significance, expect supreme identify legislature. convinces shaped forces legislature To extent policies important, legislators enacting probably influenced reflect natural affinities allocation among heirs. 514-515, 2766-2767. pattern distribution favoring brothers sisters over cousins is, example, best basis. difference mothers, convincingly factors mentioned below. Accepting views find convincing demonstration, hypothesize ignored IV 29 (8) above, Act17 squared command Accordingly, reverse remand further proceedings inconsistent opinion. So ordered. THE CHIEF JUSTICE, STEWART, BLACKMUN, REHNQUIST dissent. Like Illinois, indistinguishable They would, therefore, judgment. 32 REHNQUIST, dissenting. 33 Amendment's prohibition "any deny(ing) laws" undoubtedly majestic generalities Constitution. If, during period century since adoption, developed consistent body doctrine reasonably expound drafted adopted Amendment, there cause complaint, however unwise effective administration intentions. hand, recognizing language rather imprecise notions what meant, evolved arguably useful purpose, likewise little great dissatisfaction existing 34 Unfortunately, produced results. instead syndrome wherein seems regard cat-o'-nine-tails kept closet threat legislatures may, view judiciary, get out hand pass "arbitrary," "illogical," "unreasonable" Except Framers obviously meant apply race national origin, first cousin fairly described endless tinkering judgments, series conclusions unsupported central guiding principle. It too known warrant mention Constitution checks balances conveniently lumped descriptive "federalism," whereby power originally reside people delegated executive, legislature, reserved normally associated sovereignty reaching results did, Constitutional Convention 1787 idea members judiciary sit council revision veto unwise; proposal empowered Congress nullify several 36 Following Civil War, propounded ratified so-called "Civil War Amendments" Thirteenth, Fourteenth, Fifteenth Amendments, which, together post-Civil legislation, sharply altered balance Federal Governments. Mitchum Foster, 407 225, 238-242, 2151, 2159-2162, 705 designed accomplish vague, ill-defined ultimately discovered enactment. Their contained mechanisms accomplished. affirmatively legislate carry purposes Amendment; strike directly dictates Amendments. 37 strong medicine, intended such. read apart original understanding Philadelphia: Amendments revision, confer merely felt inimical notion public interest. 38 much common conscious level. providing duty enforcing Clause, placed position Adam Garden Eden. tripartite government constituency, back sense self-restraint, see United Butler, 297 79, 312, 325, 80 L.Ed. 477 (1936) (Stone, J., dissenting), constantly subjected human temptation containing imperfections denies simply fairer better worse long cases line, line unfortunately proclaims indeed succumbed implicit 39 itself classic paradox, makes recently fought War. creates requirement applied process legislation very treated differently. sorting distinctions acceptable unequal treatment. 40 drawing. others understandable value certain types favored place protected greater lesser degree. Obvious examples free speech, freedom unreasonable search seizure, fair trial. applying guarantees determine whether, facts, embodied offended particular equality protection, principle thing degree identifiable four corners mean persons alike. Rather, similarly situated similarly. statement crux issue. Nothing words addresses way. 42 therefore where look guidance defining "equal" word Since grew freeing slaves, core early aimed blacks. Strauder West Virginia, 100 303, 664 (1880); Bickel, Original Understanding Segregation Decision, 69 Harv.L.Rev. (1955). invalid tool blacks concerned, followed logically valid races concerned either. Yick Wo Hopkins, 118 356, 1064, 220 (1886). logical, though inexorable, step, extension prohibit resting origin. Oyama California, 332 633, 68 269, 249 (1948). 43 presumptive them, part, relatively easy. adjudicate faced task. alienage, because, enough latter Graham Richardson, 403 365, 1848, 534 (1971); Sugarman Dougall, 413 634, 2842, 853 (1973); Griffiths, 717, 2851, 910 (1973). While disagreement classes singled specific sufficiently close origin treatment, say inquiry germane meaning 44 Illegitimacy, case, never "suspect classification." Nonetheless, opinions statements although class," treat wedlock receive far-reaching regulating conditions. (1968); Glona American Guarantee Liability Ins. 73, 1515, 441 (1972); New Jersey Welfare Rights Org. Cahill, 411 619, 1700, 543 today effect. Ante, 766-767. source consolation, suggests carried traditional "rational basis" "minimum scrutiny" cases. time, though, confusion, unanswered remains precise sort subject. 45 "scrutiny," eyes appears "purpose" "means" chooses abounds sort. told (discussed Illinois)." 768. comments while "(t)he 'the relationships,' " statute, "bears goal." incomplete." 769. large devoted assessment "advance" Legislature mind passed section. crowning irony assertion area." 771. 46 "difficulty" "judicial task" I suggest, self-imposed one, stemming insistence reading it. doubted (in ordinary word) section presume concede Legislature, vote houses signature Governor, use today's actually expands normal something motive. Indeed, says "must "motivated" various Governor sign it, extremely complex answer "Rarely administrative operating broad mandate motivated solely single concern, 'dominant' 'primary' one. fact, properly balancing numerous competing considerations refrain reviewing merits absent showing arbitrariness irrationality." Arlington Heights Metropolitan Housing Dev. Corp., 429 252, 265, 555, 563, 50 450 (1977) 48 What apparently trying ascertain And, course, motive: Why law? difficulties, Heights, ascertaining "had mind" voted surmounted, takes inquire accomplished determines mind. apparent litigants wish succeed invalidating schizophrenia successful advocacy: convince suited accomplishment graver second-guessing special expertise whatever. Even assuming seeks serve, sits "fit" means achieve cases, invariably insists singling unitary "purpose," imperfection. Then itself: How "imperfection" ends permissible? throw hopper whole range thrown hopper. available? did? obstacles stood solutions? 51 flaw, me, absolutely nothing inferred commissions enable initial committed. antecedent mandate, created premises school legislators, instruct tasks. first, fear last, import ago Royster Guano Co. 253 412, 415, 560, 561, 64 989 (1920), declared rest having object Pitney wrote Brandeis, joined Holmes, dissented. quotation far objectionable just-quoted excerpt, me doubt decided today. 53 familiar comes time giving Due Process invalidate hoped, recur See, e. g., Concordia 292 54 830, 78 1411 (1934); Hartford Harrison, 301 459, 57 838, 81 1223 (1937). Every enacted, unless applies times places, inevitably imposes declines impose others. inevitable concomitants employ draftsmen sought prohibit. thought McGowan Maryland, 366 420, 426, 1101, 1105, 393 (1961), speaking Warren, "(a) set aside conceived it," McDonald Board Election, 394 802, 809, 89 1404, 1408, 739 (1969), again "(l)egislatures acted materials resorted grounds silent, them," put expansive review suggested above-quoted excerpt Guano. fathers, concedes, frequently presents proof. amended, alleviate difficulties previously gone wholly irrelevant circumstances exercise imagination; insufficient. mindless patently irrational, Illinois. Ill.Rev.Stat. c. 3, Effective 1976, repealed replaced Public 79-328. 2-2 1975 differs old recodified material change 2-2. briefs refer disputed continue 2-1(b) There dispute litigation. argued reach, dispute. App. 8. 14. supra. decision, assumed acknowledged. 54-56. Not contention discriminates disproportionate impact Negroes. 12th 1968 illegitimacy. follows: (1976); Beaty 478 F.2d 300 (CA5 1973), summarily aff'd, 418 901, 3190, 1150 (1974); Organization Griffin 346 F.Supp. 1226 (Md.), 1069, 689, 660 Davis 342 588 (Conn.), 678, 659 (1968). 11, limited force precedent. recognition involves "substantial stability land prompt definitive ownership decedents' 170, quoting 229 So.2d 449, 452 (La.App.1969). reaffirm view, point discrimination. self-evident, demonstrates statutes immunized scrutiny. Eskra Morton, 524 9, (CA7 1975) (Stevens, J.). discussed throughout remainder Penalizing influencing unrelated promoting quite different. Those differentiated "Bastard children" rights. "Natural children," still 537, 13, opprobrium measured, misguided, deter Evidence take variety forms, creating inaccuracy inefficiency States, recognize differences fashioning holding goes forms compromise States' interests. formal Thus, tailored eliminate burdensome methods struck wrongful-death legitimate, illegitimate, wrongful parents. characterize "statutory will." ingredient wills" "presumed intent" superficial appeal. proceeds premise could, wished, disinherit reflects permissible. term will," blind acts individuals. difference. majority preferred sentiment hardly unanimous. With individual, knowledge sheer fiction. becomes burden inertia fall. disadvantaged group frequent target discrimination, have, invoking intent." F.2d, 12-14 Labine. took form, suggesting estates, significantly "natural" "bastard," entitled parent. 534, 1018. differences, critically recent controls.

Category: 1