heightened scrutiny Flashcards
Three steps for strict scrutiny
- Must be a suspect class infringing on a fundamental right
- state must have compelling interest and look at the intent/purpose
- regulation imposed must be narrowly tailored to the compelling government interest
Explain Strauder v. West Virginia
state statute limited jury service to white male persons who are 21 years of age and citizens of the state and a black man was convicted before all white jury
holding on strauder v. west virignia
STRUCK DOWN = violates equal protection clause of 14th amendment. Right to be tried by jury of peers.
Explain Korematsu v. US
Issued orders that Japanese people that live on west coast leave homes and report to assembly centers. Man didn’t want to leave and claimed violation of EPC
Holding of Korematsu
UPHELD. NO violation. Hardships are part of war.
race specific v. race neutral
race specific - strict scrutiny
race neutral - need to do a two step analysis to see if purpose is also discriminatory
if purpose is discriminatory then apply strict scrutiny
if purpose is no discriminatory then apply rational basis
when is intermediate scrutiny used in race
never
explain trump v. hawaii
petitioners are arguging the travel ban that doesn’t allow muslimsh
holding of trump v. hawaii
UPHELD ACT. there is a legit state interest that has a reasonable approach to addressing the country’s national security needs.
what basis of review do we see in Trump v. Hawaii
Rational Basis
Explain Washington v. Davis
Black applicants claim test for police force violates EPC because it disproportionality impacts black people who constantly failed the test
Holding of Washington v. Davis
UPHELD statute and test because everyone who lacks skill fails not just black
what basis of review is used in Washington v. Davis
rational basis review
Explain Oregon v. Mitchell
voting rights act of 1965 banned literacy tests
Holding of Oregon v. Mitchell
UPHELD ACT. Even though racial history is discriminatory, history alone is not enough to trigger strict scrutiny and there must be intent.
what basis of review in Oregon v. Mitchell
rational basis review
explain pers. admin. mass v. feeney
all male veterans who qualify for civil service are considered for appointment over women
holding in pers admin mass v, feeney
must be a narrowly clear intent/ purpose to discriminate
explain village of arlington heights v. metro house dev. corp
zoning ordinance barred lower income groups from moving in
holding on village of arlington heighs
UPHELD. There was no intent or purpose to discriminate
what review is used in village of arlington heighs
rational basis review
Explain Rogers v. Lodge
election system has never elected black members to board of commissioners
holding of rogers v. Lodge
STRUCK DOWN. impact and purpose were both discriminatory
what standard of review in rogers v. lodge
strict scrutiny
explain the 3 step process for discriminatory impact and purpose
- petitioners must demonstrate two things: discriminatory impact of state action AND discriminatory purpose was a motivating factor
- If they prove prima facie case then burden shifts to the government and gov must prove discriminatory purpose was not a motivating factor and action was taken for neutral reasons
- court determines if discriminatory purpose was a motivating factor
YES = strict scrutiny
NO = rational basis review
4 ways petitioner can set forth discriminatory purpose
- evidence law is being administered in a discriminatory manner
- show that the only explanation of the law is discriminatory purpose
- legislative history
- departure from normal procedures than how normally doing things
what case describes discriminatory evidence
Yick Wo v. Hopkins
Explain Yick Wo v. Hopkins
Ordinance prohibited operation of laundry in brick stone without permit. Only approved permit for white people.
Holding in Yick Wo
STRUCK DOWN. Impact and purpose both discriminatory and unconstitutional to discriminate against group of people
what review was used in Yick WO
strict scrutiny
What case describes sole explanation
Gomillion v. Lightfoot
Explain Gomillion v. Lightfoot
Alabama statute created new boundaries for the city of Tuskegee and all black voters became outnumbered
holding in Gomillion
STRUCK DOWN. only reason is because of discrimination. There is literally no other reason to explain a 28 sided voting shape.
What case describes legislative history
Hunter v. Underwood
Explain Hunter v. Underwood
motivated by desire to disenfranchise black voters by using 1901 docs
what case describes departing from normal procedures
meredith v. Farr
Explain Meredith v. Farr
you had to provide required alumni letters to get into this law school but black man obviously couldn’t do that
