Pg 29

Question 1

What are the elements of the traditional equal protection standard of review?

Answer 1

- Rational relationship between the treatment and the legitimate government purpose
– the party attacking in the class must negate every conceivable basis that might support it to prevail

It is necessary to show that there was no legitimate state interest being furthered or the means that were chosen to further the state’s interest were irrational. If the state action is so arbitrary that it would violate the DPC, it is void.

If a law doesn’t interfere with a fundamental right or proceed on suspect lines, the class doesn’t violate the equal protection clause if it is rational.

Question 2

Under the traditional equal protection standard of review, is it necessary that the legitimate government purpose be articulated when the law is passed?

Answer 2

No. It is upheld if there’s any reasonably conceivable state of facts that could be a rational basis for the classification regardless of what the actual purpose was

Question 3

Is it necessary that a class be a perfect fit between the means and the ends under the traditional standard of review for equal protection clause?

Answer 3

No, there is leeway to approach a problem incrementally

Question 4

What are the classes that are included under the traditional standard of review for the equal protection clause?

Answer 4

Wealth and age

Question 5

Who has the burden of proof under the traditional equal protection standard of review?

Answer 5

– The plaintiff must make out a sensible argument that the law is irrational, which means there’s no fit between the purpose and the class
– then the burden shifts to the government to provide a rationale

Question 6

When must the government provide evidence to establish that they had a rational basis to make their decision under the traditional equal protection standard of review?

Answer 6

This occasionally happens if the government allegations become so doubtful that they lack any meaningful indicia of rationality. If that is the case, they are required to support their claim

Question 7

Under what standard of review for the equal protection clause do commercial and economic interests fit into?

Answer 7

The traditional equal protection standard of review

Question 8

Are mandatory retirement laws that require that all government employees retire at a certain age upheld under the EPC?

Answer 8

Yes, they are upheld under the traditional equal protection standard of review that requires a rational basis because there is no fundamental right to government employment, and this classification is based on age, so it is not suspect.

The court has said that this classification is rationally related to the state interest in keeping competent employees, and the people of the state have a legitimate need for employees to be fully capable of doing their jobs

Question 9

What is involved in the intermediate review standard under the equal protection clause?

Answer 9

This requires that the Government interest be substantially related to an important government objective. This is used for quasi-suspect classes. This requires exceedingly persuasive justification that is genuine, and not invented for the litigation.

Question 10

What are the classes that are included in intermediate review under the equal protection clause?

Answer 10

Gender, alienage, and illegitimacy

Question 11

Is it possible for a government actor to stop someone from having an opportunity based on an idea about the rules and abilities of males and females?

Answer 11

If the plaintiff can show there is no important reason for that classification, then no.

Question 12

If a class treats males and females differently on its face, is it necessary to prove some invidious intent to harm one sex in order to meet the intermediate review under the equal protection clause?

Answer 12

No, there’s a presumption that gender classes are invalid

Question 13

Who has the burden under the intermediate review standard of legal protection clause?

Answer 13

• plaintiff must first establish a class based on gender, alienage, or a legitimacy
  – then the government has to show the rest:
  • The class serves important government objectives
  • The discriminatory means used are substantially related to those objectives
  • The justification is genuine and not invented in response to litigation
  • The justification doesn’t rely on overbroad generalizations about different talents, capacities, or preferences of males and females

Question 14

What is involved in the strict scrutiny standard of review for the equal protection clause?

Answer 14

This requires a compelling government interest that is narrowly tailored. There must be intent to discriminate or invidious discrimination. Just having a disparate impact is not enough, but the purpose can be inferred from the totality of relevant facts. This applies when a government intentionally acts based on race or national origin. This involves suspect classes

Question 15

Who has the burden under the strict scrutiny standard of review for the equal protection clause?

Answer 15

– The plaintiff has a burden to make the basic argument
– the government has the ultimate burden to show a compelling government interest in the least restrictive means possible in order to justify the classification scheme

Question 16

What is the difference between the three standards of review under the equal protection clause?

Answer 16

– TRADITIONAL: must be rationally related to a legitimate government interest. This is for non-fundamental rights and non-suspect classes.
• wealth and age
- INTERMEDIATE: must be substantially related to an important government objective. This is for quasi-suspect classes.
• gender, alienage, illegitimacy
- STRICT SCRUTINY: compelling interest that is narrowly tailored. This is for suspect classes
• race, national origin

Question 17

How do you determine a suspect class?

Answer 17

Look at these factors:
– immutable characteristics like things you were born with and can’t do anything about
– ability to protect yourself in the political process
– history of discrimination
– likelihood that the class reflects prejudice

Question 18

When there is intentional discrimination or a class is suspect, what standard of review under the equal protection clause applies?

Answer 18

Strict scrutiny

Question 19

What are the elements for the strict scrutiny standard of review under the equal protection clause?

Answer 19

– it must serve a compelling government interes
- it must be narrowly tailored
– it must use the least restrictive means possible
– the state actor must justify it in the face of strict scrutiny

Question 20

Who has the burden under the strict scrutiny standard of review for equal protection?

Answer 20

The burden is on the state actor to justify the offending class scheme in the face of strict scrutiny

Question 21

What classes does the strict scrutiny standard of review under the equal protection clause apply to?

Answer 21

Any time the class is based on race or national origin or impacts a fundamental right

Question 22

If a plaintiff is not a citizen by birth and has not been naturalized, does the federal government have plenary power to admit him or not?

Answer 22

Yes, the federal government controls naturalization an immigration in the states have no power here. This is subject to strict scrutiny when the state actor is involved.

Question 23

Under the equal protection clause is it possible for states to limit certain occupations to citizens only?

Answer 23

Yes, this applies to such positions as teachers and police

Question 24

Is it possible for a state to deport someone?

Answer 24

No, only the federal government can do this unless the state has been authorized by the federal government

Question 25

If a classification has a discriminatory effect, but it isn’t intentional, does the strict scrutiny standard of the equal protection clause apply?

Answer 25

No. The classification must be intentional in order for strict scrutiny to apply. Just because the impact is disproportionate does not trigger the rule