Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Another example is the D.C. Circuit Court's ... the presence of any of which demands the harsher equal protection test. The Court must use strict scrutiny if one of ...
Where the law restricts the exercise of a fundamental right, we apply the strict scrutiny test. Under the strict scrutiny test, a statute withstands a substantive due process challenge only if the state identifies a compelling state interest that is advanced by a statute that is narrowly drawn to serve that interest in the least restrictive way ...
Under a rational basis test, the burden of proof is on the challenger so laws are rarely overturned by a rational basis test. [ 39 ] There is also a middle level of scrutiny, called intermediate scrutiny , but it is used primarily in Equal Protection cases, rather than in Due Process cases: "The standards of intermediate scrutiny have yet to ...
Breyer based his finding not on a strict scrutiny test that the plurality had used, but on a "proportionality" or "intermediate scrutiny test". [26] This test examines "whether the statute works speech-related harm that is out of proportion to its justifications."
Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Peña, 515 U.S. 200 (1995), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case which held that racial classifications, imposed by the federal government, must be analyzed under a standard of "strict scrutiny", the most stringent level of review which requires that racial classifications be narrowly tailored to further compelling governmental interests. [1]
This higher level of scrutiny, now called "strict scrutiny", was applied to strike down an inmate forced sterilization law in Skinner v. Oklahoma (1942) and in Justice Black's infamous opinion in Korematsu v. U.S. (1944) in which Japanese internment was upheld despite being subject to heightened scrutiny. Under strict scrutiny, a law will be ...
More importantly, the plurality argued for a strict standard of judicial scrutiny for those laws and regulations that classified on the basis of sex, instead of mere rational basis review. (See the appropriate section of the Equal Protection Clause article for more information on the different levels of Equal Protection scrutiny.) A heightened ...
constitutionality of race-based set-asides (strict scrutiny test) Witte v. United States: 515 U.S. 389 (1995) using "relevant conduct", as defined by the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, at sentencing does not violate double jeopardy principles Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Group of Boston: 515 U.S. 557 (1995)