Flashcards in Equal Protection Deck (10)
Romer v. Evans - Three Standards of review:
1) Strict Scrutiny
2) Intermediate Scrutiny;
3) Rational Basis
According to Romer v. Evans when is Rational Basis review usually used?
Usually used in social welfare and economic matters.
When examining a law under rational basis review, will the court examine the purpose of the law?
The court will only care what the apparent purpose behind the law is, not what the legislatures actual purpose behind the law was.
Under the rational basis test, the law will be upheld unless the government action is:
clearly wrong, a display of arbitrary power, not an exercise of judgement.
Where there is a plausible reason for the law, the court will be hands off and let the legislature do its thing
Will court all under-inclusiveness? (Railway Express v. New York)
The court will allow under-inclusiveness because the state is allowed to take small steps to accomplish a goal.
Will the court allow over-inclusiveness? (New York Transit v. Beazer)
The court holds that this is a policy choice that does not target one group or individual. Rather, it is a decision that the government has the power to make.
Over-inclusive laws are unfair to those who are unnecessarily regulated and they risk burdening a politically powerless group which would have been spared if it had enough clout to compel normal attention to its relevant costs and benefits.
What is the rational basis with bite test? (City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center)
It is the rational basis test, but it requires a little more justification. Less than intermediate, but more than rational basis.
Rational Basis Review:
The court is highly deferential to the legislature's decision on social welfare and economic decisions. There simply has to be a rational reason behind the legislature's decision to implement this law. And this reason does not have to be the real reason they did it, just a viable reason.
The law must be substantially related to a government interest.