| − | '''Rational basis review''' is the standard of constitutional review that the judiciary uses to evaluate a legislative classification which does not involve any [[suspect classifications]]. Currently, the only "suspect classifications" are race,<ref>''Brown v. Board of Education''</ref> religion,<ref>''Yick Wo v. Hopkins'' (118 U.S. 356)</ref> national origin,<ref>''Korematsu v. U.S.'' (323 U.S. 214)</ref> and gender.<ref>''U.S. v. Virginia,'' applying intermediate scrutiny</ref> Sexual orientation has been given a quasi-suspect classification.<ref>''Romer v. Evans'', see also ''Lawrence v. Texas''</ref> | + | '''Rational basis review''' is the standard of constitutional review that the judiciary uses to evaluate a legislative classification that does not involve any suspect classifications. Currently, the only "suspect classifications" are race,<ref>''Brown v. Board of Education''</ref> religion,<ref>''Yick Wo v. Hopkins'' (118 U.S. 356)</ref> national origin,<ref>''Korematsu v. U.S.'' (323 U.S. 214)</ref> and gender.<ref>''U.S. v. Virginia,'' applying intermediate scrutiny</ref> Sexual orientation has been given a quasi-suspect classification.<ref>''Romer v. Evans'', see also ''Lawrence v. Texas''</ref> |
| | The doctrine of "rational basis review" suggests that where a government classification, which adversely affects one group, involves no suspect classification against a "discrete & insular minority",<ref>''U.S. v. Carolene Products,'' 304 U.S. 144, footnote 4</ref> supports a legitimate state interest, and is reasonably related to that legitimate interest, the classification passes constitutional muster.<ref>''U.S. v. Carolene Products,'' 304 U.S. 144</ref> Even a state interest that is pretextual will be accepted; this standard of review is ''very'' light, and deferential to the state. | | The doctrine of "rational basis review" suggests that where a government classification, which adversely affects one group, involves no suspect classification against a "discrete & insular minority",<ref>''U.S. v. Carolene Products,'' 304 U.S. 144, footnote 4</ref> supports a legitimate state interest, and is reasonably related to that legitimate interest, the classification passes constitutional muster.<ref>''U.S. v. Carolene Products,'' 304 U.S. 144</ref> Even a state interest that is pretextual will be accepted; this standard of review is ''very'' light, and deferential to the state. |