![]() ![]() Strict scrutiny is the most exacting standard, a stanchion of individual liberties. However, “indicia of suspectness ” are malleable, often rendering their application imprecise and inconsistent, Under this doctrine and in order to withstand constitutional challenge,“previous cases must establish that classifications by gender must serve important governmental objectives and must be substantially related to achievement of those objectives.” The justices yank this out of their judicial toolbox to assess the “quasi-suspect” classifications of sex, illegitimacy, and immigration status. Placing the burden of proof on the government, the Burger Court first applied this stratum of judicial review in examining the constitutionality of gender categories. Intermediate scrutiny sets the bar a little higher. This legislation is constitutional until proven not. Categorizations like age, class, criminal history, and disability are placed under the weak microscope of rational basis review. This highly deferential standard has been expanded well beyond questions of economic liberty to cases where no fundamental rights (such as the right to vote) or suspect classifications (including race and religion) are implicated. ![]() T h i s d o c t r i n e s t a t e s t h a t “so far as the requirement of due process is concerned, and in the absence of other constitutional restriction, a State is free to adopt whatever economic policy may reasonably be deemed to promote public welfare, and to enforce that policy by legislation adapted to its purpose.” Rational basis review was first utilized by the post-New Deal Court regarding economic regulation. When specific contested legislation finds itself on the corner of First and East Capitol Streets NE, the Justices push up the sleeves of their robes and apply either rational basis, intermediate, or strict scrutiny. How does the Supreme Court shoulder this politically significant burden? The answer is in two words: judicial scrutiny. ![]() It is through this judge-made doctrine that the judicial branch evaluates the constitutionality of executive and legislative actions, vigilantly safeguarding individuals’ rights. If two laws conflict with each other, the Courts must decide on the operation of each, ” a quote that unfailingly reverberates within law school lecture halls on the first day. Those who apply the rule to particular cases must, of necessity, expound and interpret that rule. “ It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |