Dianne Rawlinson, a female applicant who was rejected for employment as prison guard in Alabama prison system, challenged certain state rules restricting her employment prospects under Title VII. They were requirements that all prison employees be at least 5 feet 2 inches tall and weigh at least 120 pounds, and rule expressly prohibiting women from supposing close-contact prison guard positions in maximum-security prisons (most of which were all male). What method of proving Title VII case must Rawlinson use in attacking height and weight needs? Does she require to use one of these methods to attack second rule? What argument must state use if Rawlinson establishes that height and weight needs have adverse impact? What Title VII defense might state have for second rule? With regard to second rule, suppose that at this time Alabama’s maximum-security prisons housed their male prisoners barracks-style rather than putting them in cells, and that they didn’t separate sex offenders from other prisoners.
