The Supreme Court case Lorelyn Penero Miller v. Madeleine K. Albright, Secretary of State in 1997 revolved around the issue of gender discrimination in U.S. nationality laws. Lorelyn Penero Miller, born out-of-wedlock to an American father and a Filipino mother in the Philippines, was denied U.S citizenship because her parents were not married at the time of her birth - a requirement only for children with American fathers but not mothers under Section 309(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The court ruled against Miller stating that Congress has broad power when it comes to immigration and naturalization rules even if they appear discriminatory on their face. It held that there is a substantial government interest behind these requirements as they ensure proof of blood relationship between child and parent which can be more difficult to establish for unwed citizen fathers than for unwed citizen mothers.

In the dissenting opinion for Miller v. Albright, Justice Breyer argued that the law in question, which imposed different requirements on mothers and fathers to transmit citizenship to their children born abroad out of wedlock, violated equal protection principles. He contended that there was no substantial government interest justifying this gender-based discrimination. The majority's argument about ensuring a biological link between parent and child did not hold up because both mothers and fathers could prove such a connection through modern scientific methods like DNA testing. Moreover, he disagreed with the notion that it was easier for unwed mothers than unwed fathers to establish care of their children since many factors could influence parental responsibility beyond mere physical custody at birth.