Changes

The Court held that "In order to warrant searching "equal protection" scrutiny of the age classification drawn here, appellant must establish that it "burdens a suspect group or a fundamental interest."

The Court held that "In order to warrant searching "equal protection" scrutiny of the age classification drawn here, appellant must establish that it "burdens a suspect group or a fundamental interest."

The [[United States Supreme Court]] defined a suspect group as one, "saddled with such disabilities, or subjected to such a history of purposeful unequal treatment, or relegated to such a position of political powerlessness as to command extraordinary protection from the majoritarian political process."

The [[United States Supreme Court]] defined a suspect group as one, "saddled with such disabilities, or subjected to such a history of purposeful unequal treatment, or relegated to such a position of political powerlessness as to command extraordinary protection from the majoritarian political process."<ref>San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez</ref>

Resolving that nineteen year olds did not meet the definition of a suspect group, the Court concluded that: "Massachusetts' raised "drinking age" does not offend principles of equal protection."

Resolving that nineteen year olds did not meet the definition of a suspect group, the Court concluded that: "Massachusetts' raised "drinking age" does not offend principles of equal protection."

[[Category:Circuit Cases]]

[[Category:Circuit Cases]]