ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Tuesday, January 2, 1996 TAG: 9601020190
SECTION: NATL/INTL PAGE: A1 EDITION: METRO
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
TYPE: ANALYSIS
SOURCE: DAVID G. SAVAGE LOS ANGELES TIMES
note: below
The new year begins with a legal debate on women's rights and the role of gender that has not been heard since the late 1970s.
Then, the proposed Equal Rights Amendment failed to win ratification in three-fourths of the states, but women's rights lawyers won most of the battle for the issues it represented at the Supreme Court.
In a series of rulings, the justices said legal distinctions based on gender are generally forbidden but not always.
Now the Clinton administration is urging the court to take the final step and rule once and for all that gender, like race, is a forbidden distinction in law.
The argument comes before the court in mid-January in the government's challenge to all-male Virginia Military Institute.
Under pressure from the courts to open military school enrollment, Virginia has established a new military training program for women at nearby Mary Baldwin College.
But the administration's lawyers say ``separate but equal'' is no more acceptable for women than for blacks.
``Sex, like race, is an immutable and highly visible characteristic that frequently bears no relation to ability to perform or contribute to society,'' the administration says. ``To remove any remaining ambiguity about the general illegitimacy of classifications ... based solely on sex, this court should now hold that such classifications are inherently suspect and subject to strict scrutiny,'' say U.S. Solicitor Gen. Drew Days and Deval Patrick, assistant attorney general for civil rights.
That legal formulation would put gender bias on the same footing as racial bias, a goal long sought by feminists.
But a surprising number of prominent female lawyers and educators say such a rigid rule would be not a final victory but a setback for many young women. In briefs filed on VMI's side, University of Southern California law professor Susan Estrich, former Assistant Education Secretary Diane Ravitch and Lynne V. Cheney, former chairwoman of the National Endowment for the Humanities, are among those who urge the court to tread cautiously before outlawing separate programs and facilities for women.
What about women's and men's prisons? they ask. What about battered women's shelters? What about high school and college sports, where ``separate but equal'' is the prevailing philosophy? And most important, what about private women's colleges? If gender discrimination is declared flatly unconstitutional, they say, even private women's colleges could be threatened, because they receive federal grants.
``Single-sex colleges, private as well as public, are in trouble if we lose this case,'' said Washington attorney Theodore B. Olson, who will argue VMI's case (U.S. vs. Virginia, 94-1941).
Before the 1970s, women's colleges flourished, in part because women were still excluded from many elite schools. The University of Virginia, for example, refused admission to women until 1970.
Coeducation swept across higher education in the 1970s but took a toll on women's colleges. In 1968, 268 colleges enrolled women only. This year, 83 remain.
Men's colleges have all but disappeared. VMI and the Citadel in South Carolina are the only state-funded all-male colleges. The nation's pre-eminent military academies, led by West Point, began to admit women in the 1970s.
The court challenge to VMI has revived a debate about the value of single-sex schools, one that echoes a concern of black educators. During the 1960s, black leaders fought for the integration of all-white institutions. Once that goal had been achieved, however, some turned their attention to reviving support for historically black colleges.
Feminists on both sides of the VMI case tout the extraordinary achievements of women's colleges. A 1992 survey found that one-third of the female board members among Fortune 1,000 companies were graduates of women's colleges, even though these schools account for only 4 percent of all college graduates.
Some 24 percent of women serving in Congress graduated from women's colleges, as did Hillary Rodham Clinton (Wellesley College in Massachusetts). Today, about 64,000 women are enrolled in single-sex colleges, as are about 11,000 men.
Gender segregation has all but disappeared in the public schools. The Justice Department says Baltimore and Philadelphia still operate high schools for girls only, while the Ventura, Calif., public schools have experimented with math classes for girls. In 1991, a federal judge blocked Detroit schools from operating a boys' academy.
Rather than striking down the last remnants of the past, the court should ``affirm the constitutionality of single-gender programs,'' says a brief filed on behalf of several educators. ``Research has shown that single-sex education works for many women,'' they say, and it should be preserved as an option.
``I don't think there is any doubt that single-sex education has an important role for women,'' said Estrich, a Wellesley graduate. ``So, if you believe that, then you have to ask yourself: `Why shouldn't boys have the same option?'''
However, a far greater number of women's rights groups argue that VMI's exclusionary policy is a relic of the past and should be struck down. They also fault the lower courts for relying on ``archaic stereotypes'' about ``women's nature.''
``These gross generalizations are inaccurate and misleading. They reflect mostly what society tells you is accepted,'' said Joan E. Bertin, a Columbia University attorney and expert on gender discrimination.
She and other women's rights advocates say such a ruling would not necessarily affect private women's colleges. They also join the Clinton administration in arguing that a strict rule against gender discrimination should not be applied to affirmative action programs that favor women.
LENGTH: Long : 104 linesby CNB