Court Opinion

ID: 9758114
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 23:12:19.599886+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:00:14.263300
License: Public Domain

FLAHERTY, Justice,
concurring.
I join in the opinion authored by Mr. Chief Justice Nix, but write separately to emphasize that, were it not for the Equal Rights Amendment, Pa. Const. Art. I, § 28, resort to gender-based insurance rate classifications would not be “unfairly discriminatory” under 40 P.S. § 1183(d) (1971), since such classifications may indeed be actuarily sound. Nevertheless, the Equal Rights Amendment was adopted as an expression of the people’s will on gender-based classifications, and, constrained by this constitutional mandate that “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania because of the sex of the individual,” our role is not to seek to circumvent its effect.
HUTCHINSON, J., joins this concurring opinion.