Normal standard of review in U.S. constitutional law
In U.S. constitutional law, rational basis review is the normal standard of review that courts apply when considering constitutional questions, including due process or equal protection questions under the Fifth Amendment or Fourteenth Amendment. Courts applying rational basis review seek to determine whether a law is "rationally related" to a "legitimate" government interest, whether real or hypothetical.[1] The higher levels of scrutiny are intermediate scrutiny and strict scrutiny.[2] Heightened scrutiny is applied where a suspect or quasi-suspect classification is involved, or a fundamental right is implicated.[1] In U.S. Supreme Court jurisprudence, the nature of the interest at issue determines the level of scrutiny applied by appellate courts. When courts engage in rational basis review, only the most egregious enactments, those not rationally related to a legitimate government interest, are overturned.[3][4][5]
Rational basis review tests whether the government's actions are "rationally related" to a "legitimate" government interest.[6][7] The Supreme Court has never set forth standards for determining what constitutes a legitimate government interest.[8] Under rational basis review, it is "entirely irrelevant" what end the government is actually seeking and statutes can be based on "rational speculation unsupported by evidence or empirical data".[9] Rather, if the court can merely hypothesize a "legitimate" interest served by the challenged action, it will withstand rational basis review.[10] Judges following the Supreme Court's instructions understand themselves to be "obligated to seek out other conceivable reasons for validating" challenged laws if the government is unable to justify its own policies.[11]
^ ab"Rational Basis Test". Cornell University Law School. Accessed May 13, 2022.
^"Levels of Scrutiny Under the Equal Protection Clause". University of Missouri—Kansas City School of Law. Retrieved 2020-07-16.
^"Mayo v. Wisconsin Injured Patients & Families Compensation Fund, 2018 WI 78, 383 Wis.2d 1, 914 N.W.2d 678 (2018)". Google Scholar. 2018.
^Lehman, Jeffrey; Phelps, Shirelle (2005). West's Encyclopedia of American Law. Vol. 7 (2 ed.). Detroit: Thomson/Gale. ISBN 9780787663674.
^Indest, Miles O. "Walking Dead: The Fifth Circuit Resurrects Rational Basis Review". Tulane Law Review 88.5 (2014): 993–1005. Accessed May 13, 2022.
^United States v. Carolene Products Co., 304 U.S. 144 (1938).
^"Equal Protection in Florida". Huffington Post. December 1, 2008.
^See Nollan v. California Coastal Commission, 483 U.S. 825, 834 (1987)
^FCC v. Beach Communications, Inc. 508 U.S. 307, 315 (1993)
^Sullivan, Kathleen M. & Gunther Gerald. Constitutional Law (16th ed.). Foundation Press, New York. Chapter 9 (2007).
^Starlight Sugar, Inc. v. Soto, 253 F.3d 137, 146 (1st Cir. 2001)
and 16 Related for: Rational basis review information
In U.S. constitutional law, rationalbasisreview is the normal standard of review that courts apply when considering constitutional questions, including...
alienage will receive rationalbasis scrutiny. State acts that affect unlawful immigrants are generally analyzed with rationalbasisreview unless the topic...
three basic standards of review exist: rationalbasis, intermediate scrutiny, and strict scrutiny. This form of standard of review is sometimes also called...
interest against observance of the principle. The lesser standards are rationalbasisreview and exacting or intermediate scrutiny. These standards are applied...
and A Westward Journey with Mr. Emerson (1884). The concept of rationalbasisreview can be traced to his influential 1893 article, "The Origin and Scope...
level of deciding issues using judicial review. The other levels are typically referred to as rationalbasisreview (least rigorous) and strict scrutiny...
or fundamental right is involved), or instead the more lenient "rationalbasisreview". Strict scrutiny means that a challenged statute must be "narrowly...
may now impose any regulation on abortion, provided it satisfies rationalbasisreview and does not otherwise conflict with federal law. Prior to the Court's...
Rational choice theory refers to a set of guidelines that help understand economic and social behaviour. The theory originated in the eighteenth century...
Bounded rationality is the idea that rationality is limited when individuals make decisions, and under these limitations, rational individuals will select...
rigorous strict scrutiny, intermediate standard or the least-stringent rationalbasisreview. Courts reflect on the unique legislative history and development...
claims that it was insufficient for large families, he argued that rationalbasisreview was not appropriate in cases involving "the literally vital interests...
Presumption of regularity Burden of persuasion List of legal doctrines Rationalbasisreview Gillian E. Metzger & Trevor W. Morrison, "The Presumption of Constitutionality...
UCI's equally evident desire not to proceed against him." Applying rationalbasisreview to the Federal Arbitration Act, the Stevens Amateur Sports Act,...
Global Information