Court Opinions

State Laws

US Code

US Constitution

Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc., 510 U.S. 17, 10 (1993)

Legal Research Home > United States Supreme Court > 510 U.S. > Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc., 510 U.S. 17, 10 (1993)

26

HARRIS v. FORKLIFT SYSTEMS, INC.

Ginsburg, J., concurring

ence does not alter the analysis; except in the rare case in which a bona fide occupational qualification is shown, see Automobile Workers v. Johnson Controls, Inc., 499 U. S. 187, 200-207 (1991) (construing 42 U. S. C. § 2000e-2(e)(1)), Title VII declares discriminatory practices based on race, gender, religion, or national origin equally unlawful.*

The Court's opinion, which I join, seems to me in harmony with the view expressed in this concurring statement.

*Indeed, even under the Court's equal protection jurisprudence, which requires "an exceedingly persuasive justification" for a gender-based classification, Kirchberg v. Feenstra, 450 U. S. 455, 461 (1981) (internal quotation marks omitted), it remains an open question whether "classifications based upon gender are inherently suspect." See Mississippi Univ. for Women v. Hogan, 458 U. S. 718, 724, and n. 9 (1982).

Last modified: October 4, 2007