Amicus Curiae Brief — Virginia Military Institute v. United States

Supreme Court brief1993

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

No. 92-1213

IN THE

Supreme Court of the United States

OCTOBER TERM, 1992

VIRGINIA MILITARY INSTITUTE, ef a/.,

- Petitioners,

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent.

On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the

United States Court of Appeals

for the Fourth Circuit

BRIEF AMICI CURIAE OF WELLS COLLEGE,

RANDOLPH-MACON WOMAN’S COLLEGE,

SWEET BRIAR COLLEGE, AND HOLLINS COLLEGE

IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS

DAVID M. LASCELL

Counsel of Record

DANDREA LYNN RUHLMANN

HALLENBECK, LASCELL & PINEO

73 State Street

Rochester, NY 14614

(716) 423-5900

Counsel for Amici Curiae

Wells College,

Randolph-Macon Woman's College,

Sweet Briar College, and

Hollins College

WILSON - FRES PRINTING Co Ine 789.0096 - WASHINGTON. DC. 20001

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT. .0000000........ceccceeeececeeeees

SII iis hice csmeonicidactiaianins ennsean iesesbiacknagdneises

SINGLE-SEX EDUCATION PROVIDES SUB-

STANTIAL BENEFIT TO WOMEN

NUIT. Aerveescanmsisatlidiiddescagaiaushossiunnncsint sesinanassutleciclioatina .

Page

---<

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Cases

Albert v. Carovano, 851 F.2d 561 (2d Cir. 1988)...

Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan, 458

U.S. 718 (1982) .........

Powe v. Miles, 407 F.2d 73 (2d Cir. 1968) ............

Articles

Marvin Bressler & Peter Wendell, The Sex Compo-

sition of Selective Colleges and Gender Differ-

ences in Career Aspirations, 51 J. Higher Educ.

659 (1980) ..................

A 90’s Resurgence For Women’s Colleges, USA

Today, Feb. 16, 1993

Pee eee ee eee ee CeCe ee ee

IN THE

Supreme Court of the United States

OCTOBER TERM, 1992

No. 92-1213

VIRGINIA MILITARY INSTITUTE, et al.,

Petitioners,

Vv.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent.

On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the

United States Court of Appeals

for the Fourth Circuit

BRIEF AMICI CURIAE OF WELLS COLLEGE,

RANDOLPH-MACON WOMAN’S COLLEGE,

SWEET BRIAR COLLEGE, AND HOLLINS COLLEGE

IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS

INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE

Wells College, founded in 1868, is a private woman’s

college which is located in Aurora, New York. Randolph-

Macon Woman’s College, founded in 1891, is located in

Lynchburg, Virginia. Sweet Briar College, located in

Sweet Briar, Virginia. is a woman’s college which was

founded in 1901. Hollins College, founded in 1842, is a

woman’s college at the undergraduate level in Roanoke,

Virginia. For almost a century, they have provided high

quality education for women. They believe in single-sex

education as a beneficial alternative to coeducational edu-

cation, in either a college or university setting. Wells,

Randolph-Macon, Sweet Briar, and Hollins believe that

they and other single-sex educational institutions provide

needed diversity in American postsecondary education.

Amici submit this brief to underscore the great im-

portance of single-sex education and to emphasize the

benefit of granting the Petition for Certiorari in this

case.’

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

Wells, Randoph-Macon, Sweet Briar, and Hollins have

reaffirmed their mission as small private liberal arts

colleges for women because they are convinced that single-

sex education for women provides successful training for

women. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in this case

has also acknowledged the benefit of single-sex education.

Said the Fourth Circuit in this case:

Thus, while the data support a pedagogical justifica-

tion for a single-sex education, they do not materially

favor either sex. Both men and women appear to

have benefited from single-sex education in a ma-

terially similar manner.

Pet. App. 16a (emphasis in original). Likewise, in

Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan, 458 U.S.

718 (1982), this Court recognized the legal viability of

single sex education. /d. at 728, 732 n.17.

Despite this Court’s holding in Mississippi University

For Women, however, several commentators seem to be-

lieve that public support of single-sex education is un-

constitutional and that even a private institution will be

unable to offer single-sex education if it receives federal

1 Petitioners and respondent have consented to the filing of this

brief. Copies of the parties’ consent letters have been filed with

the Clerk.

financial] assistance, state aid or merely a state or federal

tax exemption. Although the Second Circuit Court of Ap-

peals (the Circuit in which Wells is located) has twice

reaffirmed that such aid does not turn a private institu-

tion into a publie one, Albert v. Carovano, 851 F.2d 561

(2d Cir. 1988); Powe v. Miles, 407 F.2d 73 (2d Cir.

1968), commentators seem to believe that a private insti-

tution, by accepting public benefits or largess, becomes

subject to the same constitutional scrutiny as public insti-

tutions. Thus, argue these commentators, such institu-

tions will be unable to offer single-sex education. Amici

do not believe that this Court has made any such ruling,

but they offer this brief in the belief that this Court

should clear any doubt. This Court’s decision in Missis-

sippi University for Women and the District Court’s

findings in this case support the holdings there is a strong

pedagogical justification for single-sex education.

ARGUMENT

SINGLE SEX EDUCATION PROVIDES SUBSTAN-

TIAL BENEFIT TO WOMEN

As is amply demonstrated by the evidence considered

by the District Court in this case, a large number of

studies have confirmed the value and importance of single

sex education. See, for example, Marvin Bressler & Peter

Wendell, The Sex Composition of Selective Colleges and

Gender Differences in Career Aspirations, 51 J. Higher

Educ. 650, 662 (1980), cited by the Circuit Court’s opin-

ion. Pet. App. 16a.

The Cireuit Court acknowledged the merit of the

studies and the testimony supporting them.

We are thus left with three conclusions (1) single-

gender education, and VMI’s program in particular, -

is justified by a legitimate and relevant institutional

mission which favors neither sex...

Id. at 899.

The popular press also has reported an increasing

awareness of the value of single-sex education. See, e.g.,

A 90's Resurgence for Women’s Colleges, USA Today,

Feb. 16, 1993. Against such a background, this Court

cannot allow a misinterpretation of its holding in Missis-

sippi University for Women v. Hogan, supra. Instead, it

should reaffirm the value of single-sex education, hold

firmly and clearly that it has its place in the American

higher education system, and rule once again that educa-

tionally successful institutions like the amici and the

petitioner may constitutionally offer single-sex education.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the Court should grant the

Petition for Certiorari, and allow the matter to be fully

briefed and argued.

Respectfully submitted,