Intermediate scrutiny

Definition

Intermediate scrutiny is a standard of judicial review used by courts to evaluate laws or government actions that classify individuals based on certain characteristics, such as gender. This level of scrutiny requires the government to show that the law serves an important government interest and is substantially related to achieving that interest, providing a balance between protecting individual rights and allowing for some governmental regulation.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. Intermediate scrutiny was established in the case of United States v. Virginia (1996), which ruled that state-sponsored military schools must not discriminate based on gender.
2. This standard is often applied in cases involving gender discrimination, where the government must demonstrate that the challenged policy serves an important interest.
3. The application of intermediate scrutiny can lead to different outcomes compared to strict scrutiny, where the burden of proof is much higher for the government.
4. Courts use intermediate scrutiny when evaluating laws related to quasi-suspect classifications, including gender and legitimacy.
5. Laws that fail to meet the requirements of intermediate scrutiny are often struck down for being unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause.

Review Questions

• How does intermediate scrutiny differ from strict scrutiny and rational basis review in terms of its application and requirements?
  • Intermediate scrutiny falls between strict scrutiny and rational basis review. While strict scrutiny requires the government to prove a compelling interest and that the law is narrowly tailored, intermediate scrutiny only requires an important governmental interest and a substantial relationship between the law and that interest. Rational basis review is less demanding, as it only requires a legitimate interest and a rational connection. This means that intermediate scrutiny provides more protection against discrimination than rational basis but is less rigorous than strict scrutiny.
• Discuss a landmark case that utilized intermediate scrutiny and its implications for gender equality under the law.
  • United States v. Virginia (1996) is a landmark case that applied intermediate scrutiny. The Supreme Court ruled that the Virginia Military Institute's male-only admissions policy was unconstitutional because it did not serve an important governmental interest nor was it substantially related to achieving that interest. This case reinforced the principle that gender discrimination is subject to heightened scrutiny and helped shape modern interpretations of gender equality under the law.
• Evaluate how intermediate scrutiny impacts the balance between governmental interests and individual rights in cases of discrimination.
  • Intermediate scrutiny plays a crucial role in maintaining a balance between governmental interests and individual rights, particularly in cases involving discrimination based on gender or legitimacy. By requiring that laws serve an important interest and are substantially related to achieving that interest, courts can strike down policies that unjustly discriminate while still allowing governments some leeway in regulating social issues. This ensures that while individuals are protected from arbitrary discrimination, governments can still pursue legitimate aims without excessive burden. The ongoing evaluation of this standard influences how society addresses issues of equality and justice.

Related terms

Strict Scrutiny: The highest standard of review used by courts, applied to laws that infringe on fundamental rights or involve suspect classifications, requiring a compelling governmental interest and narrow tailoring.

Rational Basis Review: The lowest level of scrutiny applied to legislation or government actions, where the government only needs to show that the law is rationally related to a legitimate government interest.

Equal Protection Clause: A provision in the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution that prohibits states from denying any person equal protection under the law, serving as a foundation for challenges to discriminatory laws.