Equal protection Flashcards
SDS vs. EP
gov’t law denies right to ALL persons -> SDP
classes of ppl treated differently -> EP
Analytical approach (3 steps)
1) what TRAIT or BASIS does law use to classify?
Trait or basis involve:
- suspect classification
- quasi-suspect classification
- fundamental right (SDP rights or First Amendment rights)
2) What LEVEL of judicial review must be applied?
What is necessary to prove an intentional discriminatory classification under appropriate level of review?
3) Does gov’t law or action MEET the appropriate level of scrutiny?
Suspect classifications based on race or national origin: RULE (re: level of review)
when gov’t action INTENTIONALLY DISCRIMINATES
against a class based on RACE OR NATIONAL ORIGIN
courts apply STRICT SCRUTINY
Suspect classifications based on race or national origin: For strict or immediate scrutiny to apply, must first prove…
intentional discrimination
Suspect classifications based on race or national origin: How to prove intentional discrimination (3 ways)
1) gov’t law is discriminatory on its FACE
2) PATENTLY DISCRIMINATORY APPLICATION of a facially neutral law
3) DISCRIMINATORY MOTIVE behind law or action (circumstantial evidence of intent) (e.g. municipal ct “rigs procedures” by discounting parental earning power ONLY in cases of interracial or interethnic couples)
What level of review for gov’t action that FAVORS racial or ethnic minorities (Affirmative Action)?
strict scrutiny
Affirmative Action (race): What qualifies as “compelling interests”? (2)
1) to remedy persistent discrimination affecting READILY IDENTIFIABLE individuals (NOT “general past societal discrimination”)
(e. g. LAPD proven to engage in racially discriminatory hiring practices that denied jobs to the plaintiff class of IDENTIFIED Latino candidates)
2) achieve DIVERSITY w/i public school student body
AA (race): as to the compelling interest to achieve diversity w/i public school body, the court will…
in educational contests, court:
1) will DEFER to university’s good faith belief that race must be USED as one factor in achieving diversity BUT
2) will NOT defer to the IMPLEMENTATION of an AA program- university must prove that other non-racial methods of achieving diversity were tried and failed
Suspect classification race: AA: if AA program meets these 3 requirements, it will be considered “narrowly tailored” + red flags
1) proportionality- benefits proportional to injury, i.e. same number of ppl
2) flexibility- TIME limit must be reasonable
3) no burden on innocent third parties (i.e. the ppl not responsible for discrimination)
red flags (likely to fail strict scrutiny):
racial or ethnic quotas
disruption of seniority systems
rigid point systems for school diversification programs
Suspect classifications based on alienage: rule: when fed gov’t intentionally discriminates against ANY aliens, cts apply
rational basis review
Suspect classifications based on alienage: rule: when state or local gov’t intentionally discriminates against RESIDENT (not undoc) aliens, cts apply…
+ exception
strict scrutiny
exception: participation in self-gov’t process (voting, jury duty) OR positions in “political functions” (elective office, police, teacher)
Suspect classifications based on alienage: rule: when state or local gov’t intentionally discriminates against UNDOCUMENTED aliens, cts apply…
rational basis review
Quasi-suspect classifications based on gender: rule as to level of review
when gov’t action intentionally discriminates against a class based on gender, courts apply intermediate level scrutiny (substantially related to important gov’t interest)
Quasi-suspect classifications based on gender: classic examples of gov’t action that will be struck down
assuming INFERIORITY of one sex to the other
STEREOTYPING the proper roles of men and women
assuming FINANCIAL DEPENDENCY of women on men
Quasi-suspect classifications based on gender: AA: any gov’t action that FAVORS women must meet…
intermediate level scrutiny
gender classifications based on role stereotypes will not be allowed
