Schlesinger v. Ballard
United States Supreme Court case that upheld a federal statute that granted female Naval officers four more years of commissioned service before mandatory discharge than male Naval officers.

Schlesinger v. Ballard, 419 U.S. 498 (1975), was a United States Supreme Court case that upheld a federal statute granting female Naval officers four more years of commissioned service before mandatory discharge than male Naval officers. A group of naval officers who were discharged prior to their tenth year of commissioned service, as a result of not being promoted, received a lower rate of separation pay than female officers who were permitted to remain in service longer and receive three additional promotion board opportunities. As a result, the female officers who failed to be promoted received a higher rate of separation pay over their male counterparts. Ballard, a male officer who was passed over earned $15,000 in separation pay, but if he had been a similarly situated female officer, he argued that he would have received over $200,000 in separation pay. Ballard had also served as an enlisted sailor, but his eighteen years of total service was not enough to earn a military retirement. Although Justice Harry Blackmun's clerk pointed this out in a memorandum, Blackmun responded "We are first of all, dealing with the military and not with some civilian set-up, and I suppose this adds a protective factor to the government's position."
Decision
A federal statute granted female Naval officers thirteen years of commissioned service while allowing only nine years of commissioned service for male Naval officers before mandatory discharge. The Supreme Court held that the law passed intermediate scrutiny equal protection analysis because women, excluded from combat duty, had fewer opportunities for advancement in the military. The Court found the statute to directly compensate for the past statutory barriers to advancement did violate the Constitution. The Court' approach to the appeal was, unlike Frontiero v.
“Schlesinger v. Ballard” enters the record as united States Supreme Court case that upheld a federal statute that granted female Naval officers four more years of commissioned service before mandatory discharge than male Naval officers. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Schlesinger, Ballard and United can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“Schlesinger v. Ballard” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Schlesinger, Ballard and United provides the most credible route into that argument.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jan 1, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q7431698. None of the 1 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1975.
Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Schlesinger v. Ballard”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Schlesinger v. Ballard primary sources, Schlesinger v. Ballard archive and Schlesinger research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Schlesinger v. Ballard”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Schlesinger v. Ballard” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.