Equal Protection Flashcards
Railway Express v. NY
A traffic regulation provided that no person shall operate or cause to be operated on any street an advertising vehicle. However, business vehicles could display signs so long as the vehicles were not only used to advertise. Appellant was fined after selling space on a vehicle to advertise.
The state interest is to protect the public and makes the roads safer and less congested + less distraction.
Possibly arbitrary because its targeting trucks that are used just for advertising vs. not affecting trucks that are work trucks that post advertisements for third parties (underinclusive)
This is a matter for state authorities, they have the knowledge on the roads and safety of NYC, Court shouldn’t second guess what they say
RATIONAL BASIS
NY Transit Authority v. Beazer
NY Transit Authority refused to employ people who were actively taking methadone.
Over-inclusive: included both drug users and individuals who used it to treat withdrawal syptoms of heroin
Employer had legitimate interest in safety
rationally related to a legitimate state purpose.
RATIONAL BASIS
US Railroad Retirement Bd. v. Fritz)
This case is about railroad retirement benefits and how they were changed after an Amendment to the law was passed in 1974.
Whether the Railroad Retirement Act’s classification of some employees as eligible to receive windfall benefits while some were ineligible was arbitrary and not rationally related to a legitimate state purpose.
Under rational basis review, Congress’s actual purpose behind a law is irrelevant and the law must be upheld as not violating the Fifth Amendment if any statement of facts may reasonably be conceived to justify its discrimination
It does not matter what the stated purpose of the legislation is because any conceivable legitimate purpose of the law is enough under rational basis review. It is constitutionally irrelevant whether this reasoning in fact underlays the legislative decision because this Court has never insisted that a legislative body articulate its reasons for enacting a statute.
As long as a rational reason for the regulation can be found, which connects it to a legitimate purpose
RATIONAL BASIS
US Department of Agriculture v. Moreno
New law that only households of related members are eligible for benefits. Unrelated people living together could not get benefits.
A state regulation that arbitrarily creates two classes of persons and deprives one class of government benefits violates the Equal Protection Clause and Due Process Clause because it is based on a mere legislative preference for one class that is not rationally related to a legitimate state purpose.
Purpose was to harm a politically unpopular group (hippies), so it cannot constitute a legitimate government interest
discriminates against an entire class of persons that are in need of food aid
If there is irrational prejudice against a certain group then the heightened scrutiny test should be applied
INTERMEDIATE SCRUTINY
City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center
Cleburne Living Center was a home for the intellectually disabled. The City imposed special use permits on them that they denied.
intellectually disabled are not handicapped or politically powerless in the sense they cannot attract attention of lawmakers.
federal lawmakers have shown great appreciation for the plight of the mentally disabled and enacted significant legislation prohibiting discrimination against them.
SO they are not disadvantaged group
So rational review applies
RATIONAL BASIS
(Heller v. Doe)
Involuntary commitment for the intellectually disabled is clear and convincing. For the mentally ill, it is beyond a reasonable doubt. Guardians and family can participate as parties for the intellectually disabled but not the mentally ill.
State applied dfferent burdens of proof for mental illness vs mental disability
This is allowed so long as there is a rational basis for doing so.
There was a rational basis because mentally ill is harder to spot vs mentally disabled easier to diagnose.
RATIONAL BASIS
Obergefell v. Hodges
Must states issue marriage licenses and recognize lawful out-of-state marriages for same-sex couples?
same-sex couples should be treated equally and receive the same benefits as opposite sex couples
INTERMEDIATE SCRUTINY
Bostock v. Clayton County
Bostock worked for 10 years as a child-welfare advocate for Clayton County. Shortly after Bostock started playing in a gay softball league, the county fired him for conduct “unbecoming” a county employee.
The Civil Right Act prohibits employers from firing employees on the basis of homosexuality or transgender status.
U.S v. Virginia
Whether the school’s policy of excluding women from admission denies women equal protection of the laws, and, if so, whether the creation of an alternative school for women is the proper remedy for this denial.
The women’s college is not as effective (less resources/networking opportunities/reputation) than the male college
Virginia has not shown a justification for excluding all women from VMI’s leadership training.
Virginia argues that the existence of a single-sex school furthers the important state purpose of maintaining a diversity of public education institutions. Virginia also argues that its adversative method of training students provides educational benefits that cannot be made available, unmodified, to women.
INTERMEDIATE SCRUTINY
Geduldig v. Aiello
disability insurance system excluded from coverage certain disabilities resulting from pregnancy.
THIS IS NOT GENDER b/c:
Covered disabilities includes men and women.
Not covered disability (pregnancy) includes women
Discrimination within women not against women
so RATIONAL BASIS
and the exclusion of pregnancy disabilities from the program is rationally related to the state’s legitimate interest in maintaining the program’s self-sustainability. if California extends its coverage to all temporary disabilities accompanying pregnancy and delivery, the disability insurance program could not continue to run on employee contributions alone.
Califano v. Webster
Statute that old-age insurance benefits were computed based on a wage-earner’s average monthly wage minus his or her lowest years of earnings during a specific period of employment.
females could exclude up to three more years of low earnings from their overall computation of benefits which translated to slightly higher old-age insurance benefits for females than males.
Congress passed the statute with the sole purpose is to attempt to correct the economic disparities historically facing women in the job market.
Statute that advantages women does not violate the Equal Protection Clause if it is directed towards remedying the historical effects of economic discrimination against women in the workforce, rather than following stereotypical generalizations about women.
INTERMEDIATE
Michael M. v. Superior Court of Sonoma
A California statute made it unlawful for males to have sexual intercourse with a female younger than 18.
significant interest in preventing illegitimate pregnancies among teen females because of the significant physical, emotional, and financial risks associated with the condition.
When teen pregnancy occurs, these risks are uniquely borne by females. Additionally, very few similar risks exist to deter teen males from engaging in sexual activity that leads to pregnancy
A state’s statutory rape provision that puts criminal liability on males only, does not violate EP because the states have a substantial interest in preventing teen pregnancy.
INTERMEDIATE
(Rostker v. Goldberg)
President Carter enacted the draft for males 18-26. He included females in the draft as well. Congress responded by passing the MSSA, which stopped the President from making women sign up for the draft.
This is not a case of arbitrarily choosing to burden men over women, its just women are not similarly situation for purposes of a combat in war
In military/war situations - Court gives great deference to Congress
INTERMEDIATE
Mississippi University v. Hogan
Mississippi University is a state-sponsored university with a female-only nursing program. Hogan was a registered nurse with no degree in nursing. He applied but was denied admission despite being otherwise qualified.
The state says this compensates for past discrimination only if the members are benefiting from something they were deprived of. But here, there is no evidence women were discriminated against when the school was founded.
And excluding men doesn’t benefit women
INTERMEDIATE
Nguyen v. INS
A federal law stated that children born out of wedlock in a foreign country to an American mother is automatically an American citizen, but not for American fathers.
Does not violate because it still gives opportunity for the fathers through other methods like legitimation and declaration of paternity under oath
The difference between fathers and mothers exist because child born out of mother is clearly related, but not same biological link for fathers.
INTERMEDIATE
