context: Our decisions concerning criminal laws infected with discrimination are illustrative. The Court must entertain the objection -- and reverse the conviction -- even if the right to equal treatment resides in someone other than the defendant.
citation_a.signal: cf.
citation_a.identifier: 429 U. S. 190, 192, 210
citation_a.parenthetical: law penalizing sale of beer to males but not females aged 18 to 20 could not be enforced against vendor
citation_a.sentence: See Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U. S. 438, 452-455 (1972) (reversing conviction for distributing contraceptives because the law banning distribution violated the recipient’s right to equal protection); cf. Craig v. Boren, 429 U. S. 190, 192, 210, and n. 24 (1976) (law penalizing sale of beer to males but not females aged 18 to 20 could not be enforced against vendor).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 405 U. S. 438, 452-455
citation_b.parenthetical: reversing conviction for distributing contraceptives because the law banning distribution violated the recipient's right to equal protection
citation_b.sentence: See Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U. S. 438, 452-455 (1972) (reversing conviction for distributing contraceptives because the law banning distribution violated the recipient’s right to equal protection); cf. Craig v. Boren, 429 U. S. 190, 192, 210, and n. 24 (1976) (law penalizing sale of beer to males but not females aged 18 to 20 could not be enforced against vendor).