Case Logic

Case Logic
What are the the logic and reasoning they used to decide the Frontiero V Richardson case?

The husband would be a dependent if he relied on his wife for half of his support. The Supreme court decided that he was not.

Title 10 U.S.C. ยง 1072(2):
“Dependent,” with respect to a member . . . of a uniformed service, means —

(A) the wife;

* * * *

(C) the husband, if he is in fact, dependent on the member . . . for over one-half of his support. . .

“Appellant Joseph Frontiero is a full-time student at Huntingdon College in Montgomery, Alabama. According to the agreed stipulation of facts, his living expenses, including his share of the household expenses, total approximately $354 per month. Since he receives $205 per month in veterans’ benefits, it is clear that he is not dependent upon appellant Sharron Frontiero for more than one-half of his support.”

Do I agree with this? Absolutely not as this is clearly sexual discrimination but is backed up by a law that is also sexually discriminant. I’m here to tell you that military members make diddly squat. When I was in the military, a civilian doing the same thing I was made over $120k whereas I made $18k. My wife was making $35k and she was MY dependent. This is double standards at its finest.

Case Logic XNSLR