Intermediate Scrutiny

Definition

Intermediate scrutiny is a standard of judicial review used by courts to evaluate laws that classify individuals based on characteristics such as gender or legitimacy. This level of scrutiny requires that the government demonstrate that the law serves an important governmental objective and that the means employed to achieve that objective are substantially related to that goal, balancing the rights of individuals with the interests of the state.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. Intermediate scrutiny is typically applied in cases involving discrimination based on gender or illegitimacy, setting it apart from cases that require strict scrutiny or rational basis tests.
2. Under intermediate scrutiny, the burden of proof is on the government to show both an important governmental objective and a substantial relationship between the means and the goal.
3. This standard was established in cases such as Craig v. Boren (1976), where the Supreme Court held that gender classifications are subject to intermediate scrutiny.
4. Laws that are subject to intermediate scrutiny can be upheld if they pass both prongs of the test, unlike those subject to strict scrutiny which must meet a higher standard.
5. The application of intermediate scrutiny reflects a balance between protecting individual rights and allowing for certain government regulations that address important societal concerns.

Review Questions

• How does intermediate scrutiny differ from strict scrutiny and rational basis tests in terms of judicial review?
  • Intermediate scrutiny occupies a middle ground between strict scrutiny and rational basis tests. Strict scrutiny demands a compelling state interest and narrow tailoring of laws, while rational basis tests require only a reasonable relationship to a legitimate government interest. Intermediate scrutiny, on the other hand, requires that laws serve an important governmental objective and be substantially related to achieving that objective, allowing for more leeway than strict scrutiny but more protection than rational basis.
• In what landmark case was intermediate scrutiny first established, and what were the key findings of the ruling?
  • Intermediate scrutiny was established in Craig v. Boren (1976), where the Supreme Court ruled that gender classifications are subject to this standard. The Court found that Oklahoma's law, which allowed women to purchase beer at 18 but set the age for men at 21, was unconstitutional. The ruling highlighted that the government did not demonstrate an important objective related to gender discrimination and failed to show that the law was substantially related to achieving any such objective.
• Evaluate how the application of intermediate scrutiny affects laws regarding gender discrimination in modern contexts.
  • The application of intermediate scrutiny has significantly influenced how courts address gender discrimination in contemporary society. By requiring laws to serve important governmental interests while being closely tied to those interests, courts can strike down discriminatory practices that do not meet this threshold. This standard has led to advancements in gender equality in areas such as employment and education, compelling governments to create policies that genuinely address disparities rather than perpetuating them under the guise of regulation.

Related terms

Strict Scrutiny: The highest standard of judicial review that requires the government to show that a law serves a compelling state interest and is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest.

Rational Basis Test: The lowest level of scrutiny applied by courts, where laws are presumed constitutional as long as they have a reasonable relation to a legitimate government interest.

Equal Protection Clause: A provision in the Fourteenth Amendment that requires states to provide equal protection under the law to all people within their jurisdictions, serving as a basis for challenges against discriminatory laws.