Recovering the LaFleur Doctrine
Washington University in Saint Louis - School of Law
June 27, 2010
Yale Journal of Law and Feminism, Vol. 22, 2010
The landmark 1974 case of Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur, which held pregnancy dismissal policies unconstitutional, deserves a far more prominent place in our constitutional history and canon than the case now holds. This article uses novel historical research to recover the activism that gave rise to LaFleur and the multiple, significant meanings of the decision for workers, school boards, feminist lawyers, and the legal academy. In the early 1970s, women’s rights organizing within unions, grassroots feminist activism, and sex discrimination law all evolved in symbiotic relationship. Labor and legal feminists argued for sex equality and reproductive liberty as interdependent, necessary conditions for women to realize the status of rights-holding persons under the Fourteenth Amendment. Although decided upon the basis of an incoherent and quickly discredited theory of procedural due process, the LaFleur decision also grappled with the relationship between women’s rights to equal employment and to privacy in reproductive decision-making. Today, rigid doctrinal categories sever the constitutional right to sex equality from the right to reproductive liberty. Recovering the LaFleur doctrine entails remembering an activist vision that viewed these rights as inextricably related, as well as a moment at which the Court contemplated the significance of that relationship to women’s citizenship.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 64
Keywords: Constitutional Law, Gender and the Law, Legal History, Feminism, Equal Protection, Reproductive RightsAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: June 28, 2010 ; Last revised: March 15, 2011
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.469 seconds