Difference between revisions of "Rational basis review"
(New page: '''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...) |
(No difference)
|
Revision as of 15:31, April 26, 2007
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,[1] religion,[2] national origin,[3] gender,[4] and (possibly) sexual orientation.[5]
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"[6], supports a legitimate state interest, and is reasonably related to that legitimate interest, the classification passes constitutional muster.[7]
Rational basis classifications are largely economic, implicating only the government's police powers. The distinction between "filled" milk and real milk[8], is an example of a rational basis classification.
References
- ↑ Brown v. Board of Education
- ↑ Yick Wo v. Hopkins (118 U.S. 356)
- ↑ Korematsu v. U.S. (323 U.S. 214)
- ↑ U.S. v. Virginia, applying intermediate scrutiny
- ↑ Romer v. Evans, see also Lawrence v. Texas
- ↑ U.S. v. Carolene Products, 304 U.S. 144, footnote 4
- ↑ U.S. v. Carolene Products, 304 U.S. 144
- ↑ See Carolene Products, supra