Michael M. v. Superior Court of Sonoma County (California
450 U.S. 464 · Decided March 23, 1981 · Supreme Court of the United States
At a glance
Michael M. v. Superior Court of Sonoma County (California was decided on March 23, 1981 by a vote of 5–4. The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice William H. Rehnquist wrote the opinion announcing the judgment of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Sex discrimination (excluding employment)” in the Civil Rights area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 450 U.S. 464 · 101 S. Ct. 1200 · 67 L. Ed. 2d 437 · 1981 U.S. LEXIS 83
- Docket number
- 79-1344
- Decided
- March 23, 1981
- Argued
- November 4, 1980
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Judgment of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 5–4
- Majority opinion
- William H. Rehnquist
- Opinion assigned by
- Warren E. Burger
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Sex discrimination (excluding employment)
- Issue area
- Civil Rights
- Legal provision
- Fourteenth Amendment (equal protection)
- Type of law
- Constitutional amendment
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Byron R. White | Dissent | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Dissent | |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Special concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice William H. Rehnquist | Judgment of the Court | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
Full case caption
Michael M. v. Superior Court of Sonoma County (California, Real Party in Interest)
SCDB identifiers: case 1980-059, docket 1980-059-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Sex discrimination (excluding employment)”
- Kirchberg v. FeenstraLaw held unconstitutional
- 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