Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Rational basis review is not a genuine effort to determine the legislature's actual reasons for enacting a statute, nor to inquire into whether a statute does in fact further a legitimate end of government. A court applying rational basis review will virtually always uphold a challenged law unless every conceivable justification for it is a ...
The other levels are typically referred to as rational basis review (least rigorous) and strict scrutiny (most rigorous). In order to overcome the intermediate scrutiny test, it must be shown that the law or policy being challenged furthers an important government interest by means that are substantially related to that interest. [1] [2]
Kotch v. Board of River Port Pilot Commissioners, 330 U.S. 552 (1947), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a preference for nepotism is an acceptable rational basis for a state policy. [1] Kotch was a foundational case for the development of rational basis review. [2]
An extremely low standard of judicial review, there is a presumption that the legislation in question is constitutional and the challenging party must show that the law fails the test. Most legislation enacted by Congress or state legislatures that deals with economic regulation falls under rational basis review and, therefore, must only be ...
Therefore, any legislation that distinguishes between intellectually disabled people and others must be rationally related to a legitimate government interest in order to withstand equal protection review. This is also known as rational basis review and is the lowest level of review under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
When rational basis review is used, it means that the classification is one that overwhelmingly tends to be rational, e.g. distinguishing criminals from non-criminals. This leads to wide political discretion and a focus of judicial resources to other cases where the classification employed tends to be more suspicious, and thus close judicial ...
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 ...
The majority opinion in Romer stated that the amendment lacked "a rational relationship to legitimate state interests", and the dissent stated that the majority "evidently agrees that 'rational basis'—the normal test for compliance with the Equal Protection Clause—is the governing standard".