The U.S. Supreme Court case Arizona Governing Committee for Tax Deferred Annuity and Deferred Compensation Plans et al. v. Norris in 1982 dealt with gender discrimination in retirement plans provided by employers, specifically those that offered lower monthly benefits to women than men because women generally live longer. The court ruled that this practice violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin. The decision meant that annuity providers could no longer use gender-based actuarial tables when determining benefit amounts under employer-sponsored retirement plans.

In the dissenting opinion for Arizona Governing Committee for Tax Deferred Annuity and Deferred Compensation Plans v. Norris, it was argued that the majority's decision to apply Title VII of the Civil Rights Act retroactively would result in significant financial burdens on employers who had acted in good faith under existing law. The dissent also disagreed with the majority's interpretation of disparate impact theory, arguing that this case involved a bona fide occupational qualification where sex-based differences were actuarially justified. They contended that pension plans should not be considered discriminatory if they reflect accurate actuarial data about lifespan differences between men and women. Furthermore, they expressed concern over potential negative consequences such as discouraging employers from offering annuity options or leading to reduced benefits overall due to increased costs associated with equalizing payouts.