Kirchberg v. Feenstra
450 U.S. 455 · Decided March 23, 1981 · Supreme Court of the United States
At a glance
Kirchberg v. Feenstra was decided on March 23, 1981 unanimously (9–0). The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Sex discrimination (excluding employment)” in the Civil Rights area. SCDB records that the Court declared a state or territorial law, regulation or constitutional provision unconstitutional.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 450 U.S. 455 · 101 S. Ct. 1195 · 67 L. Ed. 2d 428 · 1981 U.S. LEXIS 82
- Docket number
- 79-1388
- Decided
- March 23, 1981
- Argued
- December 10, 1980
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 9–0 (unanimous)
- Majority opinion
- Thurgood Marshall
- Opinion assigned by
- Warren E. Burger
- How the case arrived
- Appeal
- Issue (SCDB)
- Sex discrimination (excluding employment)
- Issue area
- Civil Rights
- Legal provision
- Fourteenth Amendment (equal protection)
- Type of law
- Constitutional amendment
- Held unconstitutional
- A state or territorial law, regulation or constitutional provision
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Liberal what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Special concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Majority | |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice William H. Rehnquist | Special concurrence | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Majority |
Full case caption
Kirchberg v. Feenstra et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1980-058, docket 1980-058-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Sex discrimination (excluding employment)”
- Michael M. v. Superior Court of Sonoma County (California
- Rostker v. Goldberg
- Wengler v. Druggists Mutual Insurance Co.Law held unconstitutional
- Mississippi University for Women v. HoganLaw held unconstitutional
- Personnel Administrator of Massachusetts v. Feeney
- Parham v. Hughes
Cases on the same legal provision: Fourteenth Amendment (equal protection)
- Ball v. James
- Minnesota v. Clover Leaf Creamery Co.
- Williams v. Zbaraz
- Carey v. BrownLaw held unconstitutional
- Cabell v. Chavez-Salido
- G.D. Searle & Co. v. Cohn
Same Term, same area (Civil Rights)
- Dennis v. Sparks
- Allen v. McCurry
- United States Railroad Retirement Board v. Fritz
- Delaware State College v. Ricks
- Fedorenko v. United States
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Associated Dry Goods Corp.
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error