Massachusetts Board of Retirement v. Murgia PDF

Preview

Summary

Constitutional Law II 2020 case brief for MA Board of retirement v Murgia...

Description

MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF RETIREMENT v. MURGIA 427 U.S. 307 (1976) FACTS: Parties: Appellant: Massachusetts Board of Retirement (Δ) Appellee: Murgia (Π) Procedural History: 

District judge dismissed Π’s claim



Court of Appeals remanded back to District Court



District Court found for Π

Relevant Facts: 

Π was an MA state police officer



Δ retired Π upon his 50th birthday



Π brought action alleging that the operation of 26(3)(a) denied him equal protection of the laws

ISSUE: 

Whether a state can force its police officers to retire at a certain age

PARTIES’ ARGUMENTS: Appellant:  Appellee:  DISPOSITION OF THE COURT: 

Reversed

RULE OF LAW: 

Classifications based on age need only be rationally related to a legitimate governmental purpose

HOLDING: 

An MA statute making it mandatory for a uniformed state police officer to retire at age 50 does not deny equal protection in violation of the 14th Amendment

COURT’S REASONING:    

Equal protection analysis requires strict scrutiny of a legislative classification only whit it impermissibly interferes with the exercise of a fundamental right or operates to the peculiar disadvantage of a suspect class Mandatory retirement at 50 does not implicate any fundamental right of a uniformed state police officer over that age since the right of governmental employment is not fundamental That class of officers does not constitute a suspect class It is rationally related to the State’s announced legitimate objective of protecting the public by assuring the physical preparedness of its uniformed police...