Almost every law that comes under strict scrutiny has been reversed, and almost every law that has come under rational scrutiny has been upheld. The different levels of scrutiny define the different standards the state law must pass. For a law to pass strict scrutiny, it must be narrowly tailored and least restrictive and the state must have a compelling state interest for its enactment. For a law to pass rational scrutiny, it must be rational (the law can be over-inclusive and under-inclusive) and the state has to show that it was accomplished legally. The state only has to show that the reason for its enactment is legitimate. The burden of proof also shifts from the defendant in rational scrutiny to the state in strict scrutiny.
Rational basis test for economic issues, strict scrutiny test for racial and fundamental liberty issues, and midlevel scrutiny for gender issues
strict scrutiny
The three types of discrimination scrutiny are rational basis review, intermediate scrutiny, and strict scrutiny. These levels are used by courts to evaluate the constitutionality of laws that may discriminate against individuals or groups based on characteristics such as race, gender, or age.
Strict scrutiny is very critical observation or examination.
The government applies the Equal Protection Clause by using a framework of scrutiny levels to draw reasonable distinctions among different groups. These levels—strict scrutiny, intermediate scrutiny, and rational basis—help determine whether a law or policy is constitutional. For instance, laws affecting fundamental rights or suspect classifications like race undergo strict scrutiny, requiring a compelling government interest. Conversely, regulations concerning non-suspect classifications may only need to demonstrate a rational basis to be deemed constitutional.
All of the above are true
Strict scrutiny
All of the above are true
strict scrutiny
strict scrutiny
Strict scrutiny
Korematsu v. United States