When is rational basis used

The four dissenters, noting the important right at stake and the potentially significant barrier the fee posed to indigent parents seeking an education for their children, would have followed Plyler and applied a higher level of scrutiny.

Romer v Evans involved a challenge to a Colorado constitutional amendment that deprived gay rights activists to meaningfully lobby for legislation that would extend the protections of civil rights laws to homosexuals.

As in Plyler and Cleburne , the Court struck down the challenged law using what it called a rational basis test. In an angry dissent, Justice Scalia said the answer to the question of whether a rational basis supported the law was "obviously yes. Although vague about exactly what standard of review it was employing, the Court in in United States v Windsor struck down a key provision of the federal Defense of Marriage Act that denied federal recognition to same-sex marriages even in states where such marriages were lawful.

Writing for a 5 to 4 majority, Justice Kennedy said that Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause "containing within it the prohibition against denying any person the equal protection of the laws The actual application of the rational test in Plyler , Cleburne , Romer, and Windsor differed from that traditionally used in cases where no suspect classification or fundamental right was involved in at least one important respect: the Court in all three cases weighed the state's asserted interests and compared them to the strong individual interests at stake.

Some commentators have referred to the test used in cases such as these as "rational basis with bite. Colorado Amendment No. For example, in Nebbia v. New York in the Court explained that even under the rational basis test, a law still could not be arbitrary or discriminatory. Yet that requirement was all but abandoned by when the Supreme Court decided Williamson v.

Lee Optical. There, the Supreme Court held that even a law that enacts needless requirements and that lacks logical consistency could be constitutional, even where the law only might solve a perceived problem. Fast forward to March when the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in two cases, F. Doe , that constituted further erosion of the rational basis test as an actual test.

First for F. Beach Communications , which the Court heard arguments in last, but decided first. This case involved a challenge by satellite and television facilities to an F. The rule required such facilities to be franchised by local governmental authorities if any transmission lines from a rooftop satellite to the units in a building complex connected with any lines from a separately owned or managed building or crossed a public right-of-way.

As the rule did not draw a distinction between or discriminate against any discrete or insular minorities, the Supreme Court determined the law only had to pass rational basis review. Under this structure, judges can help the government think up a possible conceivable basis. Courts employ various standards of review to assess whether legislative acts violate constitutionally protected interests. The U. Supreme Court has articulated the rational basis test for those cases where a plaintiff alleges that the legislature has made an arbitrary or irrational decision.

When a court employs the rational basis test, it usually upholds the constitutionality of the law, because the test gives great deference to the legislative branch. A law that touches on a constitutionally protected interest must be rationally related to furthering a legitimate government interest.

In applying the rational basis test, courts begin with a strong presumption that the law or policy under review is valid. To meet this burden, the party must demonstrate that the law or policy does not have a rational basis. Remember Me. Facebook Twitter RSS. What are some examples of cases where courts apply the rational basis, intermediate scrutiny, and strict scrutiny tests?

Courts Apply the Rational Basis, Intermediate Scrutiny, and Strict Scrutiny Tests to Determine whether a Government Law or Action is Constitutional Depending on the circumstances, courts apply different tests to determine whether a law or government activity is Constitutional or not.

When do courts apply the test? That is, no one is arguing that a fundamental right is being jeopardized or someone is being discriminated against based on race or religion.

Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana Supreme Court The Supreme Court held that the rational basis test would apply to an Indiana law governing disposal of fetal remains. Winston v. City of Syracuse, F. Gallinger v. Bacerra, F. Rational Basis … the law is presumed to be valid and will be sustained if the classification drawn by the statute is rationally related to a legitimate state interest…. Intermediate scrutiny is more challenging for the government but not as difficult a test as strict scrutiny.

The state will need to show that the law has a significant or important purpose and is substantially or reasonably related to that purpose. Note that some courts applying the test might require the law to be narrowly tailored to the purpose.

The test has also been applied in cases where the government limits commercial speech and cases involving discrimination based on gender.