Have you ever watched a police procedural show or a movie about a trial?
If you have, you know that the detective or lawyer involved has a theory about the case. The theory is a narrative, or story, that the person thinks will persuade a judge or jury to decide the outcome of a case in a particular way. Ruth Bader Ginsburg was no different. The outcome she wanted for the cases she worked on was to help end the kind of discrimination she had experienced as a young lawyer. Her theories were both unique and, in many ways, effective. Little by little, the cases Ginsburg won chipped away at policies that discriminated against women – even when her client was a man.

▲ The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified, or approved, in 1791. The amendment requires that the federal government give all citizens of the United States equal protection under the law. This means that the law applies to all citizens equally. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that states give all citizens equal protection. When the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868, most people were thinking about equal protection for African Americans. A hundred years later, Ruth Bader Ginsburg argued that rights under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments applied to gender as well as race.

◀ One of Ginsburg’s tactics was to take on cases with a male plaintiff. (The plaintiff in a law case is the accuser. The defendant is the person being accused.) Her approach was to show that the law discriminated against the (male) plaintiff on the basis of gender. Her point was that all discrimination on the basis of gender – even when it was discrimination against a man – was unconstitutional. Columbia Law School professor Katherine Franke commented on Ginsburg’s approach:
Her thinking was that male judges would appreciate the injustice in a case where men were the victims, and in winning those cases she was building the scaffolding [support] for addressing the sexism women suffered. As an initial approach to combating sexism, Ginsburg’s strategy was extremely effective.
Think Piece!
Reflect on Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s strategy for making changes in the law.
What is your reaction to it?
Do you agree with Katherine Franke?

▲ In the late 1960s, Ginsburg began handling cases referred to her by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). This is an organization that defends the rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and extends them to people who have been excluded historically. Ginsburg picked cases that involved matters of gender equality. She won almost all of them. In 1972, she founded the ACLU Women’s Rights Project. The project’s mission is to protect equal rights for women under the Constitution. Here are some cases Ginsburg used for that purpose.
Reed v. Reed

Ginsburg argued her first case for the ACLU in 1971. The case is known as Reed v. Reed. (Court cases are referred to by the name of the plaintiff versus [v.] the name of the defendant.) It involved Sally and Cecil Reed, a divorced couple from Idaho.
Frontiero v. Richardson

In 1973, Ginsburg was again arguing a case in front of the Supreme Court. The case is known as Frontiero v. Richardson. Sharron Frontiero was a lieutenant in the U.S. Air Force. “Richardson” was Elliot Richardson, secretary of defense at the time. In effect, Sharron Frontiero was suing the federal government.
Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld

In 1975, Ginsburg caused the Supreme Court to address inequalities in the Social Security Act. The Social Security Act is a program that provides benefits for different groups of people. One group is people who are 65 or older. Another group is families of workers who have died. The case of Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld is the latter.
Duren v. Missouri

According to the Sixth Amendment, people charged with a crime are entitled to a jury trial. A jury is made up of 6–12 people from the state (or district) where the crime was committed. The jurors listen to the facts. Then they decide if the accused person is guilty or not guilty. The jurors are supposed to represent a cross-section of the community.
Think Piece!
Consider the different cases Ginsburg argued.
Which do you think is the most important case?
What makes you say so?

▲ While teaching at Rutgers Law School, Ginsburg became pregnant with her second child. Remembering how the school had discriminated against women regarding equal pay, she was worried she would be let go because she was pregnant. In the mid-1970s, Ginsburg and others formed the Coalition to End Discrimination Against Pregnant Workers. They appeared before Congress and wrote articles. All to highlight discrimination against pregnant women. In 1978, their efforts paid off: Congress passed the 1978 Pregnancy Discrimination Act. The law said that discrimination because of a woman’s pregnancy was illegal.