🇺🇸
Constitutional Law • Equal Protection
CONLAW#106
Legal Definition
Strict scrutiny.
Plain English Explanation
The Constitution says that everyone should be treated equally under the law. But sometimes, laws might affect certain groups of people differently, even if they don't mean to. The courts have decided that some groups, known as "suspect classes," need extra protection to make sure they're being treated fairly.
Suspect classes include groups based on race, national origin, religion, and citizenship status (alienage). For example:
(1) Race: This includes racial and ethnic minorities, such as African Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans, and Asian Americans. A law that treats people differently based on their race would be subject to strict scrutiny.
(2) National Origin: This refers to the country where a person was born or their ancestors came from. For example, if a law discriminated against people of Mexican origin, it would face strict scrutiny.
(3) Religion: Laws that single out a particular religion or treat religious groups differently are suspect. For instance, a law banning headscarves worn by Muslim women would likely trigger strict scrutiny.
(4) Alienage: This applies to non-citizens, including legal permanent residents, visa holders, and undocumented immigrants. A law denying certain rights or benefits to non-citizens would be closely examined under strict scrutiny.
If a law seems to target or negatively affect any of these suspect classes, the courts will use "strict scrutiny" to determine if the law is necessary and fair. For a law to be upheld under strict scrutiny, the government has to show two things:
(1) That the law is necessary to achieve a really important government interest. Just any government interest won't be enough - it has to be extremely compelling and important.
(2) That the law is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest using the least restrictive means possible. The law can't go beyond what is absolutely necessary to achieve the government's purpose.
So strict scrutiny sets a very high bar for the government to meet. The courts want to ensure that fundamental rights and protections against discrimination aren't infringed without an extremely good reason.
Suspect classes include groups based on race, national origin, religion, and citizenship status (alienage). For example:
(1) Race: This includes racial and ethnic minorities, such as African Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans, and Asian Americans. A law that treats people differently based on their race would be subject to strict scrutiny.
(2) National Origin: This refers to the country where a person was born or their ancestors came from. For example, if a law discriminated against people of Mexican origin, it would face strict scrutiny.
(3) Religion: Laws that single out a particular religion or treat religious groups differently are suspect. For instance, a law banning headscarves worn by Muslim women would likely trigger strict scrutiny.
(4) Alienage: This applies to non-citizens, including legal permanent residents, visa holders, and undocumented immigrants. A law denying certain rights or benefits to non-citizens would be closely examined under strict scrutiny.
If a law seems to target or negatively affect any of these suspect classes, the courts will use "strict scrutiny" to determine if the law is necessary and fair. For a law to be upheld under strict scrutiny, the government has to show two things:
(1) That the law is necessary to achieve a really important government interest. Just any government interest won't be enough - it has to be extremely compelling and important.
(2) That the law is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest using the least restrictive means possible. The law can't go beyond what is absolutely necessary to achieve the government's purpose.
So strict scrutiny sets a very high bar for the government to meet. The courts want to ensure that fundamental rights and protections against discrimination aren't infringed without an extremely good reason.
Hypothetical
Hypo 1: The state of Hypofornia passes a law requiring all businesses to close on Sundays, the Christian Sabbath. Sam, a devout Jew, challenges the law because it forces him to close his kosher deli on Saturdays (the Jewish Sabbath) and Sundays. Result: This law would face strict scrutiny because it treats religious groups differently, favoring Christian practices. Sam has a strong argument that the law violates his rights and discriminates based on religion. Hypofornia would need to prove a compelling interest in mandating Sunday closures and that this law is the least restrictive way to achieve it, which is unlikely. The law is more likely to be struck down.
Hypo 2: The city of Hyporia enacts a "Show Me Your Papers" law, allowing police to demand proof of citizenship from anyone they suspect might be undocumented. Bob, a Hispanic U.S. citizen, is repeatedly stopped and harassed under this law. Result: Laws that disproportionately target a particular national origin are subject to strict scrutiny. Bob could argue that the law encourages racial profiling and violates the Equal Protection rights of Hispanic residents, who are singled out based on perceived foreignness. Hyporia would struggle to justify such a broad, invasive law as narrowly tailored to a pressing need, especially given the discriminatory enforcement.
Hypo 2: The city of Hyporia enacts a "Show Me Your Papers" law, allowing police to demand proof of citizenship from anyone they suspect might be undocumented. Bob, a Hispanic U.S. citizen, is repeatedly stopped and harassed under this law. Result: Laws that disproportionately target a particular national origin are subject to strict scrutiny. Bob could argue that the law encourages racial profiling and violates the Equal Protection rights of Hispanic residents, who are singled out based on perceived foreignness. Hyporia would struggle to justify such a broad, invasive law as narrowly tailored to a pressing need, especially given the discriminatory enforcement.
Visual Aids
Related Concepts
The Equal Protection Clause applies to which actions?
Under the Equal Protection Clause, what level of scrutiny is applied to alienage?
Under the Equal Protection Clause, what level of scrutiny is applied to all other classifications beside fundamental right, suspect, and quasi-suspect?
Under the Equal Protection Clause, what level of scrutiny is applied to everything else?
Under the Equal Protection Clause, what level of scrutiny is applied to gender and legitimacy?
Under the Equal Protection Clause, what level of scrutiny is applied to laws benefitting women?
Under the Equal Protection Clause, what level of scrutiny is applied to quasi-suspect classification?
Under the Equal Protection Clause, what level of scrutiny is applied to race or national origin?
Under the Equal Protection Clause, what level of scrutiny is applied to undocumented alien children?
Under the Equal Protection Clause, what level of scrutiny is applied to undocumented aliens?
What is the Equal Protection Clause?
