Strict Scrutiny

Definition

Strict scrutiny is a standard of judicial review in which a law or government action is presumed to be unconstitutional unless the government can demonstrate that the law or action is narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling government interest. This high level of judicial review is applied when fundamental rights or suspect classifications are involved.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. Strict scrutiny is the most demanding standard of judicial review, requiring the government to demonstrate that a law or action is narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling government interest.
2. Laws or actions that implicate fundamental rights or suspect classifications are subject to strict scrutiny, which places a heavy burden on the government to justify the law or action.
3. The strict scrutiny test has two parts: the law or action must be narrowly tailored, and the government interest must be compelling.
4. Strict scrutiny is a high bar for the government to meet, and laws or actions that fail to satisfy this standard are typically struck down as unconstitutional.
5. The strict scrutiny standard is intended to protect against government overreach and ensure that fundamental rights and vulnerable groups are not unfairly targeted.

Review Questions

• Explain how the strict scrutiny standard applies to laws or government actions that implicate fundamental rights.
  • When a law or government action implicates a fundamental right, such as the freedom of speech or the right to privacy, the strict scrutiny standard requires the government to demonstrate that the law or action is narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling government interest. This means the government must show that the law or action is the least restrictive means of achieving its objective and that the objective is of the highest importance. The burden is on the government to justify the law or action, and if it fails to meet this high bar, the law or action will be struck down as unconstitutional.
• Describe how the strict scrutiny standard differs from the intermediate scrutiny standard in the context of civil rights and liberties.
  • The strict scrutiny standard is more demanding than the intermediate scrutiny standard. While intermediate scrutiny requires the government to show that a law or action is substantially related to an important government interest, strict scrutiny requires the government to demonstrate that the law or action is narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling government interest. The strict scrutiny standard is applied when fundamental rights or suspect classifications are involved, such as race, religion, or national origin. This higher level of judicial review is intended to provide greater protection for these essential rights and vulnerable groups, as the government faces a heavier burden to justify its actions under strict scrutiny.
• Analyze how the application of strict scrutiny has impacted the protection of civil rights and liberties in the United States.
  • The strict scrutiny standard has played a crucial role in safeguarding civil rights and liberties in the United States. By requiring the government to meet a high bar of demonstrating a compelling interest and narrow tailoring, strict scrutiny has helped to ensure that fundamental rights, such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and equal protection under the law, are not infringed upon by government overreach. The strict scrutiny standard has been particularly important in protecting the rights of vulnerable groups, such as racial and religious minorities, from discriminatory laws and policies. The rigorous nature of this standard has led to the invalidation of numerous laws and government actions that have been found to violate these essential civil rights and liberties, thereby strengthening the protection of individual freedoms in the United States.

Related terms

Fundamental Rights:

Fundamental rights are rights that are considered so essential to individual liberty that they are protected from government interference, even if the government has a compelling interest.

Suspect Classifications: Suspect classifications are categories of people, such as race, religion, or national origin, that are considered so vulnerable to discrimination that laws targeting them are subject to the highest level of judicial review.

Intermediate Scrutiny:

Intermediate scrutiny is a standard of judicial review that is less demanding than strict scrutiny, requiring the government to show that a law or action is substantially related to an important government interest.