Plot Explained Spoilers guaranteed!
Plot Explained

Browse by genre

On the Basis of Sex (2018) movie poster

Plot Summary

On the Basis of Sex (2018) Plot Summary Explained

Release, runtime and language
2018 · 120 min · English
Echo score 64
Loading streaming availability…
Directed by
Mimi Leder
Starring
Jack Reynor, Justin Theroux, Armie Hammer, Felicity Jones, Sam Waterston, Chris Mulkey
Budget
$20M

Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a young lawyer and mother, challenges societal norms and confronts personal and professional obstacles while fighting for gender equality. Alongside her husband, Martin, she takes on a pivotal tax case that has the potential to fundamentally alter the legal system and establish her legacy as a champion for women’s rights. The case becomes a catalyst for a broader legal battle against gender discrimination.

On this page (6)
  1. 1 Where to watch
  2. 2 What happens: full plot
  3. 3 Plot questions answered
  4. 4 Movie threads
  5. 5 Movies like On the Basis of Sex
  6. 6 Every angle
Loading streaming availability…

Full plot summary · contains spoilers

What Happens in On the Basis of Sex: Full Plot Summary

The whole story of On the Basis of Sex (2018) explained, from the opening scene to the final frame: every key event, every twist and what it all adds up to. Read it as a quick recap before the sequel, to check a scene you missed, or to finally understand what really happened.

In 1956, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, portrayed by Felicity Jones, embarks on her first year at Harvard Law School. While she diligently attends her own classes, she also takes on the responsibility of attending her husband Martin's lectures, played by Armie Hammer, who is in his second year but has fallen ill due to cancer. Amidst her academic pursuits and caring for their infant daughter Jane, represented by Cailee Spaeny, Ruth shows remarkable resilience.

As the years pass, Martin’s cancer goes into remission, leading him to accept a position at a prominent firm in New York. However, Ruth faces an obstacle when she petitions Dean Griswold, a character portrayed by Sam Waterston, at Harvard to allow her to complete her law degree at Columbia Law School. To her dismay, he adheres strictly to university policies, prompting Ruth to transfer to Columbia instead. Even with her stellar academic performance, she struggles to secure a position at a law firm due to the prevalent gender biases of the era. Ultimately, she takes on a teaching role at Rutgers Law School, focusing on “Sex Discrimination and the Law.”

In 1970, Martin introduces Ruth to a pivotal case: Moritz v. Commissioner, concerning Charles Moritz, portrayed by Chris Mulkey. Moritz, a man who employed a nurse for his aging mother, finds himself denied a tax deduction that was unfairly awarded only to specific categories including women. Ruth seizes this moment to challenge gender discrimination through the legal system, believing that by setting a precedent for a man discriminated against, she can pave the way for future cases affecting women.

Determined, Ruth approaches Mel Wulf from the ACLU for assistance, but he initially declines. After some persuasion from activist Dorothy Kenyon, who transforms from skepticism to support, Ruth inspires Wulf to come on board. She then travels to Denver to meet Moritz, who agrees to allow Ruth and the ACLU to represent him pro bono, understanding the far-reaching implications of their case.

As the legal battle escalates, James H. Bozarth, portrayed by Jack Reynor, steps forward to lead the defense. He meticulously researches gender-related sections of the US Code, presenting a strong argument against the constitutionality of the existing law. Meanwhile, Ruth, lacking courtroom experience, grapples with anxiety during practice sessions. With Wulf’s encouragement, Martin takes the lead in the courtroom, while Ruth argues the equal protection aspects.

Amidst the proceedings, the government presents a meager settlement of one dollar to Moritz, which Ruth counters with a more substantial proposal: acknowledgment of the deduction claim with a declaration about the unconstitutional nature of the gender restrictions. Faced with refusals from the government, the case proceeds to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals.

During the oral arguments, Martin inadvertently allocates more time than planned to their position. Nervous yet determined, Ruth utilizes her rebuttal with clarity and conviction, arguing for the urgency to evolve laws alongside societal changes. She asserts, > “Societal roles that existed one hundred years ago, or even twenty years ago, no longer apply.” When challenged regarding the Constitution’s silence on “woman,” she boldly retorts that it also lacks the term “freedom.”

As they await the court's decision, Ruth, the Ginsburgs, and Wulf share a moment of celebration, recognizing her transformative growth as a lawyer. The narrative concludes with triumphant titles revealing the Court of Appeals’ unanimous ruling in favor of Moritz. Ruth’s groundbreaking work leads to the co-founding of the Women’s Rights Project at the ACLU, dismantling numerous discriminatory laws, and in 1993, she is voted into an associate justice position on the U.S. Supreme Court. The film closes with the real Ruth Bader Ginsburg ascending the steps of the Supreme Court building, symbolizing her legacy in the fight for justice and equality.

Last updated: November 04, 2024 at 01:43

Was this helpful?

Plot questions answered

On the Basis of Sex Plot Explained: Your Questions Answered

The questions people ask most about On the Basis of Sex (2018): what happens in the confusing scenes, why the characters do what they do, the twists, hidden details and what the ending means. Each answer contains spoilers.

Q1

Why did Ruth Bader Ginsburg attend her husband's classes at Harvard?

Ruth attended Martin's lectures because he was in his second year of law school but had fallen ill with cancer. She took detailed notes and learned the material herself so she could help him keep up with his coursework while he underwent treatment. This also allowed her to observe the classes she wasn't yet officially permitted to take.

  • harvard law school
  • martin ginsburg
  • cancer
  • law school
Q2

Why did Ruth transfer from Harvard to Columbia Law School?

Ruth petitioned Harvard to let her complete her degree at Columbia so she could be closer to Martin, who had accepted a job in New York after his cancer went into remission. Dean Griswold refused, citing strict university policy. Ruth then applied and transferred to Columbia, where she eventually graduated at the top of her class.

Foreshadowing: Earlier, Martin's recovery allowed him to take the New York position that made proximity to Columbia necessary.

  • harvard law school
  • columbia law school
  • dean griswold
  • transfer
Q3

Why couldn't Ruth get a job at a law firm after graduating from Columbia?

Despite graduating at the top of her class at Columbia Law School, Ruth was rejected by every law firm she applied to. This was due to the pervasive gender discrimination of the era, firms simply would not hire women as attorneys. Unable to find a position in private practice, Ruth accepted a teaching position at Rutgers Law School.

  • gender discrimination
  • law firm
  • rutgers law school
  • career barriers
Q4

Why did Ruth choose a man's tax case to fight gender discrimination?

Ruth intentionally selected Charles Moritz's case because he was a man denied a tax deduction for caring for his elderly mother, a benefit the law restricted to women, widows, and widowers only. By winning a case that demonstrated gender discrimination harmed men too, she could establish a broader constitutional precedent that would benefit women in future lawsuits.

  • moritz v commissioner
  • tax deduction
  • gender discrimination precedent
  • charles moritz
Q5

What was the Moritz v. Commissioner case about?

Moritz v. Commissioner (1972) involved Charles Moritz, who hired a nurse to care for his elderly mother. He was denied a tax deduction for this expense because the law only allowed the deduction for women, widows, widowers, or men with wives. Ruth argued this gender-based restriction violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

  • moritz case
  • tax deduction
  • equal protection
  • tenth circuit
Q6

Why did the ACLU initially refuse to take Ruth's case?

Mel Wulf from the ACLU initially declined because he believed the organization should focus on cases affecting women directly, not a man seeking a tax benefit. Activist Dorothy Kenyon convinced him that winning for a man would set a precedent that could help women in subsequent cases, changing his mind.

  • aclu
  • mel wulf
  • dorothy kenyon
  • legal representation
Q7

Why did Martin argue the case instead of Ruth in court?

Although Ruth developed the legal strategy and arguments, Martin took the lead in courtroom presentation because Ruth had never argued a case before and was extremely nervous during practice sessions. Their collaborator James Bozarth also played a significant role in researching the constitutional arguments. Ruth delivered the rebuttal, which proved decisive.

  • martin ginsburg
  • courtroom
  • james bozarth
  • oral arguments
Q8

What did Ruth mean when she said the Constitution doesn't mention 'woman' or 'freedom'?

During oral arguments, when challenged about the Constitution's silence on women, Ruth responded that it also doesn't mention 'freedom.' She argued that the framers wrote the Constitution broadly enough to evolve with society, and that gender roles from 100 or even 20 years ago no longer applied to modern life.

  • constitution
  • oral arguments
  • equality
  • legal precedent
Q9

What happened after Ruth won the Moritz case?

After the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unanimously in Moritz's favor, Ruth went on to co-found the ACLU's Women's Rights Project. Using the precedent she established, she successfully challenged numerous discriminatory laws across the country. The victory marked the beginning of her career as a leading constitutional lawyer fighting gender discrimination.

  • aclu women's rights project
  • tenth circuit
  • legal precedent
  • career
Q10

How did Ruth Bader Ginsburg become a Supreme Court justice?

Following her groundbreaking legal work with the ACLU, Ruth built a reputation as one of the nation's leading experts on gender discrimination law. In 1993, President Bill Clinton nominated her to the U.S. Supreme Court, where she served as an Associate Justice until her death in 2020.

  • supreme court
  • 1993
  • bill clinton
  • associate justice

Movie threads

More Movies Like On the Basis of Sex, by Mood & Story

Curated lists built around what makes On the Basis of Sex tick: the same mood, the same kind of story or the same emotional payoff. Each list explains why these movies belong together.

Inspiring legal underdog stories like On the Basis of Sex

Stories of determined individuals taking on the system for a greater cause. Find more movies like On the Basis of Sex that focus on determined individuals fighting systemic injustice through landmark court cases. These films share a steady, hopeful pace and deliver a satisfying, uplifting conclusion to their real-world legal battles.

  • inspiring
  • determined
  • tense
  • uplifting
  • resilient
  • serious
  • Tone: hopeful, determined, inspiring
  • Pacing: steady, procedural
Why these movies?

The story pattern: The narrative typically follows a clear, straightforward arc: a protagonist identifies a legal injustice, gathers evidence and allies, and faces off against a powerful, indifferent system. The central conflict is intellectual and procedural, building tension through courtroom strategy and personal conviction rather than physical action.

Why they belong together: Movies are grouped here for their shared focus on a single, pivotal legal case as a vehicle for social change, their inspiring tone, and their celebration of resilience and intellectual triumph over prejudice.

Biographies of quiet resilience like Ruth Bader Ginsburg in On the Basis of Sex

Character-driven stories of perseverance that change the world through steady conviction. If you liked the steady, determined journey of Ruth Bader Ginsburg in On the Basis of Sex, explore these other biographical dramas. They feature real-life figures who overcome obstacles not with flashy action, but with persistent intellect and unwavering principle.

  • inspiring
  • resilient
  • serious
  • optimistic
  • determined
  • grounded
  • Tone: hopeful, serious, optimistic
  • Pacing: steady, chronological
Why these movies?

The story pattern: The narrative pattern is a linear, chronological journey through key life events, highlighting personal sacrifices, professional rejections, and small victories that accumulate toward a larger legacy. The emotional journey is one of steadfastness, where the protagonist's internal strength is their primary weapon.

Why they belong together: These films are united by their straightforward biographical structure, their medium emotional weight, and their central theme of perseverance. They share a hopeful, steady vibe that focuses on character and conviction over fast-paced plot twists.

If you liked this

Movies Like On the Basis of Sex

Similar movies to On the Basis of Sex: the same genre, themes or kind of story. Each one comes with its own plot summary, timeline and ending explained.

Browse all movie summaries

Every angle

On the Basis of Sex (2018) Explained: Plot, Timeline & Characters

Everything about On the Basis of Sex in one place: what happens in the plot summary, the timeline in chronological order, the characters and meaning and a spoiler-free summary. What's After the Movie adds the cast, box office and post-credit scenes.

Coming soon on iOS and Android

The Plot Explained Movie Summary App

Plot summaries, endings explained and timelines on your phone. Catch up on any movie in minutes, save your favorites and never miss a twist again.

Be the first to know when we launch. Your email stays private, always.

Learn more about the app