View source for Pennsylvania ERA

A Pennsylvania court invoked the Pennsylvania ERA to end the all-boys prestigious public school known as "Central High School" in Philadelphia.

From the opinion in 1983, which the school did not appeal:

:[R]eading the plain and simple words of the [Pennsylvania] ERA, we hold that it triggers application of strict judicial scrutiny whenever gender-based discrimination emanates from statutes, regulations, rulings and similar governmental action.Applying the strict judicial scrutiny test, we conclude that there does not exist a compelling governmental interest in maintaining the two schools as separate, single-gender institutions; and, further, that the means used to achieve the concept of single-gender schooling belies the professed, but vague, interest asserted by defendants of "providing . . . students academic options to improve the quality of education offered." 

:CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

:1. The certification of this proceeding as a class-action matter under the provisions of Pa.R.C.P. 1702, is hereby confirmed; further, the criteria set forth in Pa.R. C.P. 1708 for maintenance of a class-action proceeding have been met and satisfied; further, the representative parties, the named plaintiffs, have fairly and adequately asserted and protected the interests of the class.

:2. Statutes, regulations, rulings and the like, emanating from governmental action, which discriminate between persons based on gender, must -- under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment -- serve important governmental objectives; further, the means employed must at least be substantially related to achievement of those objectives. "The burden . . . is on those defending the discrimination to make out the claimed justification. . . ."  Defendants in this proceeding have failed to satisfy either criterion and, hence, have failed to meet their burden.  

:3. The maintenance of single-gender public schools  -- specifically in this instance, Central High School (for males only) and Philadelphia High School for Girls (for females only) -- does not serve an important governmental objective; moreover, 

:4. The maintenance of these two public schools as single-gender institutions is in violation of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, to the particular detriment of the named plaintiffs and the representative class.

:5. Statutes, regulations, rulings and the like, emanating from governmental action, which discriminate between persons based on gender, are -- under Article I, Section 28 (the "Equal Rights Amendment") of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania -- subject at least to the test of "strict judicial scrutiny"; that is to say, they must serve a compelling interest, and the means adopted to achieve the goal must be necessary and, where applicable, precisely drawn.

:6. Defendants in this proceeding have failed to satisfy either criterion of "strict judicial scrutiny" and, hence, have failed to meet their burden.

:7. The maintenance of the two, single-gender public schools sub judice is in violation of the provisions of Article I, Section 28, of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
        
''Newberg v. Bd. of Pub. Educ.'', No. 822, 1983 Phila. Ct. Com. Pl. LEXIS 1, at *67-70 (C.P. Sep. 28, 1983).
[[category:ERA]]