heightened scrutiny

Question 1

Three steps for strict scrutiny

Answer 1

1. Must be a suspect class infringing on a fundamental right
2. state must have compelling interest and look at the intent/purpose
3. regulation imposed must be narrowly tailored to the compelling government interest

Question 2

Explain Strauder v. West Virginia

Answer 2

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

Question 3

holding on strauder v. west virignia

Answer 3

STRUCK DOWN = violates equal protection clause of 14th amendment. Right to be tried by jury of peers.

Question 4

Explain Korematsu v. US

Answer 4

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

Question 5

Holding of Korematsu

Answer 5

UPHELD. NO violation. Hardships are part of war.

Question 6

race specific v. race neutral

Answer 6

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

Question 7

when is intermediate scrutiny used in race

Answer 7

never

Question 8

explain trump v. hawaii

Answer 8

petitioners are arguging the travel ban that doesn’t allow muslimsh

Question 9

holding of trump v. hawaii

Answer 9

UPHELD ACT. there is a legit state interest that has a reasonable approach to addressing the country’s national security needs.

Question 10

what basis of review do we see in Trump v. Hawaii

Answer 10

Rational Basis

Question 11

Explain Washington v. Davis

Answer 11

Black applicants claim test for police force violates EPC because it disproportionality impacts black people who constantly failed the test

Question 12

Holding of Washington v. Davis

Answer 12

UPHELD statute and test because everyone who lacks skill fails not just black

Question 13

what basis of review is used in Washington v. Davis

Answer 13

rational basis review

Question 14

Explain Oregon v. Mitchell

Answer 14

voting rights act of 1965 banned literacy tests

Question 15

Holding of Oregon v. Mitchell

Answer 15

UPHELD ACT. Even though racial history is discriminatory, history alone is not enough to trigger strict scrutiny and there must be intent.

Question 16

what basis of review in Oregon v. Mitchell

Answer 16

rational basis review

Question 17

explain pers. admin. mass v. feeney

Answer 17

all male veterans who qualify for civil service are considered for appointment over women

Question 18

holding in pers admin mass v, feeney

Answer 18

must be a narrowly clear intent/ purpose to discriminate

Question 19

explain village of arlington heights v. metro house dev. corp

Answer 19

zoning ordinance barred lower income groups from moving in

Question 20

holding on village of arlington heighs

Answer 20

UPHELD. There was no intent or purpose to discriminate

Question 21

what review is used in village of arlington heighs

Answer 21

rational basis review

Question 22

Explain Rogers v. Lodge

Answer 22

election system has never elected black members to board of commissioners

Question 23

holding of rogers v. Lodge

Answer 23

STRUCK DOWN. impact and purpose were both discriminatory

Question 24

what standard of review in rogers v. lodge

Answer 24

strict scrutiny

Question 25

explain the 3 step process for discriminatory impact and purpose

Answer 25

1. petitioners must demonstrate two things: discriminatory impact of state action AND discriminatory purpose was a motivating factor
2. 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
3. court determines if discriminatory purpose was a motivating factor
   YES = strict scrutiny
   NO = rational basis review

Question 26

4 ways petitioner can set forth discriminatory purpose

Answer 26

1. evidence law is being administered in a discriminatory manner
2. show that the only explanation of the law is discriminatory purpose
3. legislative history
4. departure from normal procedures than how normally doing things

Question 27

what case describes discriminatory evidence

Answer 27

Yick Wo v. Hopkins

Question 28

Explain Yick Wo v. Hopkins

Answer 28

Ordinance prohibited operation of laundry in brick stone without permit. Only approved permit for white people.

Question 29

Holding in Yick Wo

Answer 29

STRUCK DOWN. Impact and purpose both discriminatory and unconstitutional to discriminate against group of people

Question 30

what review was used in Yick WO

Answer 30

strict scrutiny

Question 31

What case describes sole explanation

Answer 31

Gomillion v. Lightfoot

Question 32

Explain Gomillion v. Lightfoot

Answer 32

Alabama statute created new boundaries for the city of Tuskegee and all black voters became outnumbered

Question 33

holding in Gomillion

Answer 33

STRUCK DOWN. only reason is because of discrimination. There is literally no other reason to explain a 28 sided voting shape.

Question 34

What case describes legislative history

Answer 34

Hunter v. Underwood

Question 35

Explain Hunter v. Underwood

Answer 35

motivated by desire to disenfranchise black voters by using 1901 docs

Question 36

what case describes departing from normal procedures

Answer 36

meredith v. Farr

Question 37

Explain Meredith v. Farr

Answer 37

you had to provide required alumni letters to get into this law school but black man obviously couldn’t do that