Equal Protection Flashcards
Basic Equal Protection Rule
Those who are similarly situated should be treated similarly.
In any case challenging a government classification, the court assesses constitutionality by considering:
1) The nature of the classification
2) the government interest in the challenged regulation; and
3) the relationship between the government’s interest and the regulation
The court applies strict scrutiny to suspect classifications and fundamental rights, intermediate scrutiny to quasi suspect classifications, and rational basis to all other classifications.
Proving Discriminatory Classification
For strict or intermediate scrutiny to apply in an equal protection challenge, there must be intent on the part of the government to discriminate. Discriminatory may be shown by
1) facial discrimination - a law that is discriminatory on its face
2) a discriminatory application of a facially neutral law; or
3) a facially neutral law with a disparate impact on a protected class of people
However, 2 & 3 require an additional showing of discriminatory intent (must show discriminatory purpose and effect). A discriminatory application or effect along is not sufficient.
Suspect Classifications
Classifications are suspect if they are based on race, national origin, or (at the state and local levels) alienage.
School Integration
Intentional segregation violates the constitution. If school systems and attendance zones are established in a racially neutral manner, there is no violation. This is true even is housing patterns result in racial imbalance in schools.
Remedying Intentional School Segregation
If its proven that a school board has engaged in racial districting of schools, the board must take esops to eliminate the effects of that discrimination (for example busing students).
If the school refuses to do so, a court can order the school district to take all appropriate steps to eliminate the discrimination, but the order cannot go beyond the purpose of remedying the past effects of segregation.
NOTE - assigning students to public or primary school on the basis of race solely to promote diversity, as opposed to remedying past intentional segregation, is unconstitutional
Discriminatory Legislative Apportionment
If a plaintiff can show that a redistricting plan was drawn up predominantly on the basis of racial considerations, strict scrutiny is triggered and the plan will violate the equal protection clause unless the government can show that the plan is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest.
Federal Alienage Classifications
Because congress has plenary power over aliens, federal alienage classifications are not subject to strict scrutiny. They are subject to rational basis and will be upheld so long as they are not arbitrary and unreasonable.
State/Local Alienage Classifications
Generally, state/local classifications based on alienage are suspect and subject to strict scrutiny.
Self-Government Process Exception
– If a law discriminates against alien participation in state government (voting, jury service, elective office), the rational basis standard applies.
– The rational basis standard is also used for state and local laws limiting certain non-elective offices involving important public policy (police officers, probation officers, school teachers)
Undocumented Aliens Classifications
Undocumented aliens are not a suspect classification - classifications are only subject to rational basis.
HOWEVER, the denial of free public education to undocumented alien children has been held invalid. Strict scrutiny does not apply, but the court has used language evoking both rational basis and intermediate scrutiny.
What are the quasi suspect classifications
Classifications based on legitimacy and gender are quasi suspect
Standard for Gender Classifications
Gender is reviewed under an altered intermediate scrutiny:
1) the regulation must be substantially related to an important government purpose; and
2) the government bears the burden of showing an exceedingly persuasive justification for the discrimination
Gender classifications based solely on role stereotypes are generally invalid, whereas those designed to remedy past discrimination are more likely to be upheld under intermediate scrutiny.
Specific Gender Classifications and Validity
– Gender Based Death Benefits = invalid
– Gender Based Preemptory Strikes = Invalid
– Alimony for women only = invalid
– discriminatory minimum drinking age = invalid
– discriminatory statutory rape laws = valid
– all male draft = valid
– requiring fathers but not mothers to prove parentage of non marital children born abroad in order to obtain US citizenship for them = valid
Marital v. Non-marital Children Classifications
Distinctions drawn between marital children and non marital children are reviewed under intermediate scrutiny - they must be substantially related to an important government interest
Discriminatory regulations intended to punish non marital children are invalid
NOTE - a law requiring non marital children to establish paternity before inheriting from the father is valid because it promote efficient disposition of the property at death (important government interest)
Other Classifications
All other classifications are reviewed under rational basis (age, disability, wealth)
However, if the government’s only interest in denying a benefit to or imposing a burden on a group of people is dislike of them, the classification will not meet rational basis review.
