Talk:Virginia Women's Institute for Leadership

Military history: North America / United States

This redirect is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

SCOTUS review

The Act of Congress referred to, the 1972 Amendment to the Civil Rights Act, contains a provision (under the heading of Title IX, Section 1681.4) that specifically exempts military colleges from its other provisions with regard to gender; that is, all Federal service Academies and Senior Military Colleges (of which VMI is one) were not required to enroll females (ref. http://www.maec.org/annotate.html). The Academies became intergrated by 1975; 1997 Supreme Court case (maj. opinion written by Ginsburg) struct down only one portion of the 1972 Act, the provision exempting military colleges, in a newly-invented tool of judicial review that did not previously exist; that is, if an Act is found unconstitutional, it is null and void in its entirety; judges may not amend or abridge law in any fashion, only evaluate its constitutional legality. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.254.0.10 (talk • contribs) 21:05, 17 July 2006

Branch Coastguard

I've removed the line which states that branch coastguard is offered at VWIL as there is no reference to this program being offered at VWIL on their website. The other 4 branches are listed. Of course, if it cann be proved that it is indeed being offered then by all means put it back (with cite). Plutonium27 (talk) 18:57, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty Blatant Spam

I've added an advert tag. This article consists almost entirely of material from promotional literature as far as I can see. Also, I think that the only way in which this program could be considered notable is due to the role it played in United States v. Virginia. Hence it would almost certainly be more appropriate to merge this article into that one, which I am going to propose right now. Alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 14:56, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I took out all the spammy material, removed the advert tag, and added a bunch of citation needed tags. I believe that only encyclopedic material remains, but looking at it after these edits, I remain convinced that it ought to be merged into US v. VA. Alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 01:28, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]