Substantive Due Process Flashcards
Substantive due process principals
Substantive due process principles are based upon the idea that laws should be reasonable and not arbitrary.*
As a result, states cannot deprive individuals of life, liberty, or property without adequate justification—even if adequate procedures are employed.
Levels of Justification
substantive due process
The required level of justification depends on whether the law deprives the individual of:
1) an ordinary right – under the rational basis test, the law is presumed valid until the challenger shows that the law has no rational relation to any legitimate government interest OR
2) a fundamental right – under the strict scrutiny test, the law is presumed invalid until the government shows that the law is necessary to achieve a compelling government interest.
When does substantive due process apply?
Substantive due process applies when a right is being infringed upon as to all persons, while equal protection principles apply when a right is denied only to a particular class of persons.
An ex post facto law is a legislative act that imposes retroactive ______________ punishments by punishing conduct that occurred before the law was enacted.
Criminal
Substantive due process challenges involving the deprivation of ordinary rights are subject to which test?
Substantive due process challenges involving the deprivation of ordinary rights (e.g., employment) are subject to the rational basis test, under which a law is presumed valid until the challenger shows that the law has no rational relation to any legitimate government interest.
What level of scrutiny must a civil law that retroactively impair an ordinary right pass?
“Laws that retroactively impair an ordinary right—e.g., the right to raise the statute of limitations as a defense—can be challenged on substantive due process grounds. Such laws are reviewed under rational basis scrutiny and therefore are generally constitutional.”
Civil laws that retroactively impair an ordinary right—e.g., the right to raise the statute of limitations as a defense—must undergo rational basis scrutiny.
Under this test, the law is presumed valid until the challenger shows that the law’s retroactive application has no rational relation to any legitimate government interest.
What level of scrutiny must laws that infringe upon an ordinary right (e.g., the right to sell alcohol) pass?
Laws that infringe upon an ordinary right (e.g., the right to sell alcohol) can be challenged on substantive due process grounds and are subject to rational basis review. This requires the challenger to show that the law is not rationally related to a legitimate government interest.
Example:
The city’s zoning ordinance prohibited the sale of alcohol within 800 feet of public high schools. This infringed upon the liquor store owner’s ability to sell alcohol, which is an ordinary right. However, since most purchases of alcohol by minors occurred at stores within 800 feet of a public high school, the ordinance is rationally related to the city’s legitimate interest in reducing underage drinking.
State laws that substantially impair a fundamental right—e.g., the right to privacy, which includes related persons’ right to reside together in a single household—must undergo and survive what level of scrutiny?
State laws that substantially impair a fundamental right—e.g., the right to privacy, which includes related persons’ right to reside together in a single household—must undergo and survive strict scrutiny.
This difficult test requires that the state perform the nearly impossible task of showing that its law is necessary (i.e., the least restrictive means) to achieve a compelling state interest.
Is family membership a suspect classification?
NO.
But related persons’ right to reside together in a single household is a fundamental right and subject to strict scrutiny.
Do parents have an absolute fundamental right to control their children’s upbringing and education?
NO.
The Fourteenth Amendment due process clause generally prohibits states from enacting laws that substantially impair the right to privacy, which includes parents’ right to control their children’s upbringing and education.
However, this fundamental right is not absolute. SCOTUS has stated that states may impose reasonable educational standards on public and private schools—including homeschooling—that:
1) require children to attend school—e.g., by specifying the number of hours of educational instruction a child must receive during an academic year
2) establish minimum competency requirements for instructors—e.g., by requiring them to possess at least a high school diploma AND
3) define academic curriculum and content—e.g., by specifying the academic subjects that must be taught.
Is national origin a suspect classification under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause?
YES.
National origin is a suspect classification under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
Strict Scrutiny would apply.
