Hogan, Lt. Leslie’s case first proves similar in its content. Specifically, in Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan, Hogan argues that his denied admission to the Mississippi University for Women (MUW) solely centered on his sex violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment . This is congruent with the allegation made by Lt. Leslie. In both cases, both individuals are prohibited from fully participating in opportunities based on their sex alone regardless of their qualifications. The Court in Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan found this gender-based action to be in violation of the Constitution. This conclusion was made by the implication of intermediate scrutiny which Lt. Leslie’s case will be held to
Hogan, Lt. Leslie’s case first proves similar in its content. Specifically, in Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan, Hogan argues that his denied admission to the Mississippi University for Women (MUW) solely centered on his sex violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment . This is congruent with the allegation made by Lt. Leslie. In both cases, both individuals are prohibited from fully participating in opportunities based on their sex alone regardless of their qualifications. The Court in Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan found this gender-based action to be in violation of the Constitution. This conclusion was made by the implication of intermediate scrutiny which Lt. Leslie’s case will be held to