Confirm favorite deletion?
Constitutional Law Keyed to Farber
United States v. Virginia
Citation:United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515, 116 S. Ct. 2264, 135 L.Ed.2d 735 (1996)
CaseCast™ – "What you need to know"
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
- Topic: Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.
- Parties: Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.
- Procedural Posture & History: Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.
- Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.: A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.
- Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises: Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
- Brief Facts: A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.
- Rule of Law: Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.
- Facts: What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case. Review the Facts of this case here:
VMI was the Virginia’s only single-sex, public, higher education institution. VMI employs an “adversative method,” involving physical rigor, mental stress, absolute equality of treatment, absence of privacy, etc. As an answer to the United States’ first challenge to the courts that women were missing out on a unique educational opportunity, the state of Virginia established the Virginia Women’s Institute for Leadership (“VWIL”) for women. VWIL offered fewer courses than VMI and was run without the adversative method. The single-sex admissions policy of VMI was again challenged and the VWIL alleged to be an insufficient answer to the equal protection issues.
- Issue(s): Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.
- Holding: Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.
- Concurring / Dissenting Opinions: Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.
- Reasoning and Analysis: Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.