Court Opinion

ID: 9427039
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 23:19:31.202653+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:23:03.580223
License: Public Domain

Mr. Chief Justice Burger,
concurring.
I join Mr. Justice Marshall’s opinion for the Court. With all deference, Mr. Justice Stevens’ opinion does not persuade me that the analysis in the Court’s opinion is in any significant way inconsistent with the Court’s unanimous holding in Califano v. Jobst, ante, p. 47. Unlike the intentional and substantial interference with the right to marry effected by the Wisconsin statute at issue here, the Social Security Act provisions challenged in Jobst did not constitute an “attempt to interfere with the individual’s -freedom to make a decision as important as marriage,” Califano v. Jobst, ante, at 54, and, at most, had an indirect impact on that decision. It is with this understanding that I join the Court’s opinion today.