# Faulkner v. Jones

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · November 17, 1993 · 10 F.3d 226

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6928952

## Case

- **Full name:** Shannon Richey FAULKNER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated United States of America v. James E. JONES, Jr., Chairman, Board of Visitors of The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina Carroll A. Campbell, Jr., Member of the Board of Visitors of The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina T. Easton Marchant, Member of the Board of Visitors of The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina Barbara S. Nielsen, Member of the Board of Visitors of The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina William F. Prioleau, Jr., Member of the Board of Visitors of The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina William E. Jenkinson, III, Member of the Board of Visitors of The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina Leonard C. Fulghum, Jr., Member of the Board of Visitors of The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina James M. Leland, Jr., Member of the Board of Visitors of The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina John A. McAllister, Jr., Member of the Board of Visitors of The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina Davis S. Boyd, Jr., Member of the Board of Visitors of The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina Julian G. Frasier, III, Member of the Board of Visitors of The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina Larry J. Ferguson, Member of the Board of Visitors of The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina Steve D. Peper, Member of the Board of Visitors of The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina Wallace I. West, Jr., Director of Admissions and Recruiting at The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina Claudius E. Watts, III, President of The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina State of South Carolina The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina The Board of Visitors of the Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** November 17, 1993
- **Citations:** 10 F.3d 226; 1993 WL 471350
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Hall
- **Judges:** Hall, Hamilton, Niemeyer
- **Cited by:** 64 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6928952

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding no abuse of 11 discretion in the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen when 12 “evidence submitted by petitioner in support of her motion 13 was not ‘material’ because it did not rebut the adverse 14 credibility finding that provided the basis for the IJ’s 15 denial of pe…
- stating that separate restroom facilities do not violate equal protection principles, because that “gender classification is justified by acknowledged differences” between men and women and is confirmed by “society’s undisputed approval of separate public rest rooms for men an…
- noting “society’s undisputed approval of separate public restrooms for men and women based on privacy concerns” and explaining that “distinctions in any separate facilities provided for males and females may be based on real difference between the sexes, both in quality and qu…
- stating that the "inability to establish irreparable harm `is by itself a sufficient ground upon which to deny a preliminary injunc- tion'"
- affirming lower court’s order requiring that the Citadel, an all-male state military college, allow female plaintiff to enroll in its day program

## Opinion text

K.K. HALL, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
Notwithstanding this court’s holding in VMI, I question whether, under the Equal Protection Clause, a state can ever have a sufficiently important interest to justify expending public funds to maintain an institution that not only practices inequality, but celebrates it.
Nevertheless, being bound by VMI, I concur in the opinion. I heartily concur in the result.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6928952. Public record. Not legal advice.