Gov’t must show that they have a truly significant reason for discriminating and cannot achieve objective through any less discriminatory alternative Gov’t has burden of proof law will NOT be upheld unless gov’t – persuade the CT fatal to the law Intermediate scrutiny: Gender and non-marital children intermediate scrutiny a law is upheld if it is substantially related to an important gov’t purpose The objective does not have to be compelling, only important The means must not be necessary BUT must have a substantial relationship to the end Gov’t has burden of proof Rational basis: EVERYTHING ELSE Under rational basis the law will be upheld if it is rationally related to a legitimate gov’t purpose Gov’t objective ONLY must be a legitimate gov’t action The means only must be a rational way to meet the end Challenger has burden of proof VERY DEFERENTIAL TO GOV’T Criteria to determine the level of scrutiny: Immutable characteristics (race, national origin, gender and marital status of parents) warrant heightened scrutiny The ability of the group to protect itself through political process Historical discrimination against group Likelihood the classification reflects prejudice as opposed to permissible gov’t purpose Question #3: Does the Government Action Meet the Level of Scrutiny? CT evaluates the ends and the means The Ct focuses on the degree to which a law is under-inclusive and/or over-inclusive Law is if it does not apply to individuals who are similar to those to whom the law applies Law is over-inclusive if it applies to those who need not be included for the gov’t to achieve its purpose law unnecessarily – applies to a group of people The fact that a law is under or over inclusive does not mean it will be invalidated most laws or one or both – Laws are under-inclusive because the gov’t chooses to proceed one step at a time Under and over inclusiveness is used by the CT to evaluate the fit between the ends and means The higher the level of scrutiny a closer fit is required The Protection of Fundamental Rights Under Equal Protection
Gov’t must show that they have a truly significant reason for discriminating and cannot achieve objective through any less discriminatory alternative Gov’t has burden of proof – law will NOT be upheld unless gov’t persuade the CT fatal to the law Intermediate scrutiny: Gender and non-marital children intermediate scrutiny a law is upheld if it is substantially related to an important gov’t purpose The objective does not have to be compelling, only important The means must not be necessary BUT must have a substantial relationship to the end Gov’t has burden of proof Rational basis: EVERYTHING ELSE Under rational basis the law will be upheld if it is rationally related to a legitimate gov’t purpose Gov’t objective ONLY must be a legitimate gov’t action The means only must be a rational way to meet the end Challenger has burden of proof VERY DEFERENTIAL TO GOV’T Criteria to determine the level of scrutiny: Immutable characteristics (race, national origin, gender and marital status of parents) warrant heightened scrutiny The ability of the group to protect itself through political process Historical discrimination against group Likelihood the classification reflects prejudice as opposed to permissible gov’t purpose Question #3: Does the Government Action Meet the Level of Scrutiny? CT evaluates the ends and the means The Ct focuses on the degree to which a law is under-inclusive and/or over-inclusive Law is if it does not apply to individuals who are similar to those to whom the law applies Law is over-inclusive if it applies to those who need not be included for the gov’t to achieve its purpose – law unnecessarily applies to a group of people The fact that a law is under or over inclusive does not mean it will be invalidated – most laws or one or both Laws are under-inclusive because the gov’t chooses to proceed one step at a time Under and over inclusiveness is used by the CT to evaluate the fit between the ends and means The higher the level of scrutiny a closer fit is required The Protection of Fundamental Rights Under Equal Protection
Constitutional-Law-West-Falcon-2015.docx