In the case of Ohio Municipal Judges Association et al. v. Davis et al., 1972, the U.S Supreme Court was asked to consider whether a state law that required municipal judges to retire at age 70 violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The plaintiffs, a group of municipal judges in Ohio who were over or nearing this age limit, argued that it did because it discriminated against them based on their age without any rational basis for doing so. The court ruled in favor of Davis and upheld Ohio's mandatory retirement law for its municipal judges. It found that there is indeed a rational basis for such laws: ensuring mental and physical fitness among those serving as judges given their important role in society. Therefore, these laws do not violate equal protection rights under the Constitution. This decision affirmed states' power to set reasonable qualifications (including maximum ages) for public officials like judges while also protecting older individuals from arbitrary discrimination.

In the dissenting opinion for Ohio Municipal Judges Association et al. v. Davis et al., Justice Douglas argued that the majority's decision to uphold a law requiring judges to retire at age 70 was unjust and discriminatory based on age, violating equal protection rights under the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. He contended that mandatory retirement ages were arbitrary and did not take into account individual capabilities or performance levels, which could vary widely among individuals of similar ages. Furthermore, he pointed out inconsistencies in applying such laws; while judges were forced to retire at 70 regardless of their abilities, no such restrictions applied to other public officials like governors or senators who arguably held equally important roles in society.