![]() Spends her free time reading, cooking, and exploring the great outdoors. Mary has a liberal arts degree from Goddard College and In a rational basis review, it’s the individual or organization bringing the challenge that must supply proof that the government violated the equal protection clause.Įver since she began contributing to the site several years ago, Mary has embraced theĮxciting challenge of being a MyLawQuestions researcher and writer. This is in contrast to rational basis reviews, the lowest level of scrutiny used. The government also has a similar burden of proof in cases subject to strict scrutiny, the highest level of scrutiny applied. The meaning of STRICT SCRUTINY is the highest level of judicial scrutiny that is applied especially to a law that allegedly violates equal protection in. It’s not the responsibility of the plaintiff to prove that laws violate constitutional rights, but instead the responsibility of the government to successfully defend challenges made against controversial laws. In cases of heightened or intermediate scrutiny, the burden of proof rests with the government. In some cases, heightened scrutiny is also applied to discriminatory statutes and policies on the part of government agencies, such as the military. Even executive orders signed by the president can be taken to court. Challenges can be made to laws passed by Congress, state legislatures and the federal government. Heightened scrutiny applies to lawsuits against the government. Usually, First Amendment cases require strict scrutiny, but when regulations are broader in scope and involve guidelines for entire industries, heightened scrutiny may be sufficient. Sometimes, this type of scrutiny is applied to cases involving the First Amendment. ![]() If a state law offered public education for all children, except those born out of wedlock, it would be a form of discrimination subject to heightened scrutiny. These are also known as illegitimacy cases. Intermediate scrutiny is also used for cases involving children born outside of marriage. Supreme Court has not applied heightened scrutiny to any laws regarding sexual orientation, however. Circuit Court of Appeals found the practice unconstitutional and applied the standard of heightened scrutiny to the case. One example was a law that allowed prosecutors to remove jurors from a case solely based on sexual orientation. Not all federal appeals courts or state courts apply this level of scrutiny to sexual orientation cases, but many do. ![]() A different but similar situation involves sexual orientation, such as being gay or lesbian.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |