In the case of Morris v. Weinberger, the United States Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over Social Security benefits. The petitioner, Mrs. Morris, was denied mother's insurance benefits on her deceased husband's earnings record because she had remarried before reaching age 60 and thus did not meet one of the eligibility requirements under Section 202(g) of the Social Security Act. She argued that this provision violated her Fifth Amendment right to due process by creating an irrational classification based on marital status and age. The court rejected this argument stating that Congress has broad powers in setting up social welfare programs like Social Security and can establish classifications as long as they are reasonable means to achieve legitimate ends. In this case, it found that encouraging older widows to remarry (and thereby potentially reducing their dependence on public assistance) is a valid legislative goal; hence denying them benefits upon remarriage does not violate due process rights. Furthermore, it held that there was no discrimination against younger widows since those who remarry after turning 60 also lose their eligibility for these specific benefits - just at a later point than those who remarry earlier.

In the dissenting opinion for Morris v. Weinberger, Justice Douglas argued that the Social Security Act's provision denying benefits to widows under 60 who remarry was unconstitutional. He contended that this rule unfairly penalized women for remarriage and thus violated their right to equal protection under the law. Douglas believed there was no rational basis for such a distinction in treatment between older and younger widows or between those who choose to remarry and those who do not. He also pointed out that men were not subjected to similar restrictions on their eligibility for social security benefits based on marital status changes, further highlighting gender-based discrimination inherent in this policy.