Fundamental Rights Flashcards
Is the right to travel a fundamental right and what is a durations residency requirement?
Yes. Regulations that are subject to strict scrutiny, which includes the fundamental right to travel, will not be upheld if they merely serve a rational or reasonable interest they must show a suit justification and that there are no least restrictive means of obtaining the goal. The government made no affirmative showing that the waiting period is narrowly tailored to any interest, let alone a compelling one. Individuals have a fundamental right to travel from state to state, which encompasses the right: (i) to leave and enter another state; and (ii) to be treated equally and enjoy the same privileges and immunities as other citizens of that state if they become permanent residents. Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489 (1999). Although the right to travel is not explicitly given by any single constitutional provision, the Court has held this fundamental right to be protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.
When a state uses a durational residency requirement (a waiting period) for dispensing benefits, that requirement should normally be subject to strict scrutiny. This means that the government must show that the waiting period requirement is tailored to promote a compelling interest. However, in some right to travel cases, the Court has been unclear as to whether it is actually using strict scrutiny. The important point is that state residency requirements should not be upheld merely because they have some theoretical rational relationship to an arguably legitimate interest of the government. For example, a one-year waiting period before a person may receive state-subsidized medical care has been held to be invalid. See Mem’l Hosp. v. Maricopa County, 415 U.S. 250 (1974).
Analysis
Furthermore, the woman is not a “transient nonresident,” but a new permanent resident of the state, guaranteeing her the same privileges as any other resident who has lived there longer.
What is an example of rational basis review?
The plaintiff must demonstrate that there is no rational relationship between the ordinance and any legitimate state interest, because the ordinance regulates economic activity of a type normally presumed to be within state regulatory authority.
What is an example of strict scrutiny?
The city must demonstrate that the ordinance is necessary to serve a compelling state interest, because it adversely affects the fundamental right of rental housing owners to use their property in the manner they deem most economically efficient.
What is an example of intermediate scrutiny?
The city must demonstrate that the ordinance is not substantially related to an important state interest, because it requires some owners of rental housing to invest money that they will not be able to recoup from increased rents.
What scrutiny applies to alienage statues?
Alienage statues must pass strict scrutiny unless the statue deals with self governance and rational basis review will apply.
Alienage is a suspect class. Therefore, the state may only classify on the basis of alienage if the state can prove that the classification is narrowly tailored to promote a compelling state interest. State laws requiring United States citizenship for welfare benefits, civil service jobs, or a license to practice law will be struck down because there is no compelling state interest. However, there is an exception for alien participation in self-government. If a law discriminates against alien participation in the functioning of the state government, only rational basis review is applied. Certain privileges fall under this exception and have been reserved just for citizens: voting, serving on a jury, acting as a police officer, teacher, or probation officer, or any other position with a direct effect on the functioning of government. Garbage collector falls under a civil service job and is not part of the exception for participation in self-government. Therefore, strict scrutiny is used and not rational basis review.
State and local laws based on alienage are subject to strict scrutiny unless part of the exception. As explained above, garbage collector falls under a civil service job and is not part of the exception for participation in self-government. Therefore, strict scrutiny is used and not rational basis review.
