Equal Protection (E/P)
- Classification & E/P
- 14th Amend.
- No state shall ...deny 2 any person w/in its jxn the E/P of
- Classification 2 Reg. People
- Acceptable Treatment of Person / Conduct by E/P
- Same treatment
- Rsn 2 classify
- Forbid invidious, irrational, / arb. classif.
- Under & Overincl. Classif.
- Gen'ly not arb. / irrational
- Govt proceed 1 step @ a X
- If dif'al treatment even marginally 2 supposed goal, ok by
- Means -Ends Rel.: E/P Tests
- Classif. Serves End So Test How Well It Serves
- Three Levels of Rev.
- Rational Basis Rev. (RR)
- Lowest level 4 ord. econ. & soc. leg. & alien 4 fed.
- Legit. purpose & meets end in marginal way, ok
- S.t.'s applies stricter stand.
- Interm. Scrutiny
- For gender & birth status
- Imp. aim / goal so fit must B good / subst'l
- Strict Scrutiny (SS)
- For suspect classif. of race, relig., nat'l origin, ethnicity,
/ alien 4 state AND fund'al rts of vote, travel, & access
- Compelling aim / goal so fit must B as good as possible
- Fed. E/P: 5th Amend.
- Interp. 5th D/P 2 req. fed. govt 2 prov. E/P
- Leg. Purpose
- When leg. silent, Ct accept / invent hypo purpose so E/P if
classif. could promote that (RR Express v. NY; Williamson v. Lee
- Actual purpose of what stt. does not stated purpose in stt
- Ways 2 Protect Min. from Maj.
- Naked pref. stand. (min.) where justify all leg. by ref. 2
some pub. value
- RR w/bite (maj.) so test classif. against likely purpose of
"substl'l basis in actuality"
- Sliding Scale E/P / balance (min.) so rigorous rev. w/int.
- Ad hocery where ct not say what they do
- Could req. enhanced means test (Schweiker, Powell) of fair
& subst'l rel. 4 hypo purpose
- Ad Hocery: Irrational When Leg. by Fear
- Too overincl. & really targeted hippies, (Moreno), deny
mental group home (Cleburne), & target homosexual orientation
- SS & Suspect Classif.
- Racial Classif.
- Per se unConst'al & can't B used unless compelling int.
like war (Korematsu)
- Bar facially nondiscrim. racial stt's (Loving v. Virg.; Hunter
- No legit. purpose
- Disadv. race / premised on inferiority of 1 race
- Bar racial classif. which screen, accommodate, / facilitate
priv. discrim. (Palmore v. Sidoti)
- Racial Sep.
- Plessy era of sep. but = b/c no stigma w/Plessy Remedy of
putting res's 2 bring seg'ed part up 2 stand.
- Brown holding that state can't discrim. by race on any pub.
accommodation b/c sep. is inherently unequal by stigmatizing
- Some prob's of Brown holding
- Based on soc. science data
- 14th A. framers not intended 4 E/P 2 req. racial integ.
- Not address why overturn seg. on everything, not just ed.
- Not address why no applic. 2 de facto seg.
- Alienage Classif.
- Cong'al Pwr: Const. Art I, §8 4 Uniform Rule of Naturalization
- Plenary auth. over immig. & nat. so can place condition
on entry, immig., & naturalization
- RR & can draft residenty reqt, reg. benefit / work
- No State Auth. Over Immig. & Nat.
- 14th E/P applies 2 persons not cit's so aliens entitled 2
- Kinds of Cases
- Benefit cases where can't deny immig. benefit available 2
state cit's & other residents
- Empl. cases where can't deny aliens empl. in "common
occupations of the community"
- Polit. fn exception 2 empl. cases where state may excl. aliens
from pub. empl. involving carrying out sig. polit. fn's
- Incl's high state office who has discretionary dec. making,
auth. 2 use pub. force, / train 4 cit.
- Two Part Test 2 Det. Polit. Fn. Exception
- Not under / over incl.
- Even if good fit, apply only 2 officers who participate dir'ly
in formulation, exec., / rev. of broad pub. policy & perf.
fn that go rt 2 hear of rep. govt (state elective / imp. nonelective
exec., leg. / jud.)
- Charact's of Suspect Classif. (rarely relev. as means 2 reach
- Historically ass'ed w/extreme domination, viol, abuse, &
act of approp.
- Rely on unalterable, distinct, & ID'able traits 4 "discrete
& insular" min's w/little ability 2 attain soc. &
- Trait / classif. used by maj. 2
- Def. out group
- Mark superiority-inferiority myth
- Maintain pwr
- Closed class 2 race, ethnicity, alienage, & relig.
- Need 4 Suspect Classif.
- To protect min. from racial dom. b/c recog. polit. pwrlessness
- Interm. Scrutiny: Q-Suspect Classif.
- Gender Classif.
- Can use if exceedingly persuasive justif.
- Imp. govt'al purpose / goal AND
- Means / classif. used 2 achieve purpose has subst'l / close
- Real dif. btwn sexes justify dif. treatment (not in similar
- Stereotype in Stt's
- Men more competent
- Women dependent
- Benign Classif.
- Stt expressly designed & rsbly well tailored 2 confer
benefits on women 2 remedy prior soc.'al discrim.
- State must show
- Women actual suffered disadv. AND
- Classif. leads subst'ly & dir'ly 2 stt's compensatory
- Unlike suspect classif. & SS b/c race can't B used 4 benign
- Sexual Dif. / Dissimarly Sit'ed Stt Cases
- Real dif. btwn sexes
- Actual sit'al dif's btwn sexes
- Illegit. / family rel. involving adm. convenience in settling
parental / filiation rts
- Leg. Purpose
- Must have actual purpose, not hypo purpose
- If no stated purpose, must find honest purpose not invent
- Factors 4 Interm. Scrutiny
- Adm. conv.
- Add'l burden
- Hardship on state
- Jgmt call s.t.'s
- Illegit. Classif.
- Rsns 4 Use
- Historically 4 soc. basis of discrim.
- Now used 2
- Assist state improve det. of filiation & dep.
- Adm. eff. / conv.
- Kinds of Cases
- Wrongful death axns
- Workers' comp
- Soc. Sec. Survivor's benefit
- Parental support
- Inter-state inheritance
- Paternity suits
- Other E/P Issues
- Discrim. Purpose & Effect
- Suspect Classif. w/Discrim. Purpose Viol's E/P
- Discrim. effect can B evid. of Const'al viol. but gen'ly not
Const'al viol. / proof of discrim. purpose by itself (Wash v.
- Prob. of Sophisticated Discrim.
- Might B facially neutral but picks surrogate trait instead
of suspect classif. 2 discrim. by race b/c knows will have same
- Exception 2 Gen. Rule of Discrim. Effect Not Const'al Viol.
- When discrim. effect so great no other justif. than discrim.
purpose (Yick Wo)
- Jury selection cases where need cross sectional rep. of jury
but 1 race disprop'ly not rep'ed / discrim. effect so discrim.
- School deseg. cases where b/c of prior de jure discrim., school
under aff. duty 2 correct but effect of prior seg. cont.
- Cong. auth. 2 decl. by stt. cert. discrim. effect unlawful
- Proving Discrim. Purpose 4 Mixed Motivation Cases
- Show unConst'al motivation as 1 of motivating factor in dec.
4 prima facie unConst'al viol. of discirm. purpose
- Shift b/p if can make out prima facie case so D needs 2 show
same axn would've been taken even w/o discrim. motive
- If D can't show, then scrutiny 4 approp. classif.
- If D can show, RR
- Foreseeability Cases (Feeney)
- Mere foreseeability that will have discrim. effect not make
out Const'al viol. b/c can make dec. in spite of, not b/c of discrim.
impact of dec.
- Two Ways of Discrim. Intent (Rogers v. Lodge)
- Intent 4 passage of law
- Discrim. maintenance of law neutral on its face 4 racial effect
- School Deseg. Cases
- Const'al Oblgn
- Remedy Prior De Jure Sys. of Seg.
- Create integ'ed school sys. not just end seg.
- Aff. Duty Doc.
- Effect test so must stop neutral criteria / policies w/effect
of maintaining dual sys.
- Officials must take all steps nec.
- Deseg. Plan: Fed Cts' Broad Remedial Pwrs (Swann)
- Local control so local school bd. always comes up w/1st plan
- Presume 1 race school so school bd. has b/p
- Ct can use ratio / #'s as guidline 4 racial balance but not
- Fed. ct. can override neighborhood attendance zones
- Busing is approp. remedy if nec. 2 end duty sys.
- Post -Swann Remedies
- No inter-dist. remedy 4 intra-dist. viol. so Plessy Remedy
- Ct can tell school dist. 2 incr. tax if nec. 2 cov. deseg.
- Can order contempt sanctions (Spallone)
- Intent Doc. (Keyes)
- When no de jure seg., req's proof of seg. intent
- If seg. intent in meaningful portion of school dist., assume
discrim. in other parts R result of seg. intent so b/p on school
- Causation & Scope of Remedy
- Failure 2 remedy prior seg. by only partial seg., cont'ing
- Presume current school seg. b/c of earlier seg. if school
- Scope of Const'al viol. limits scope of remedy (Miliken &
no inter dist. remedy)
- After unitary sys. created, no new official seg. intent so
no more oblgn 2 integ. by Const. (Spangler & Dowell Cases)
- Aff. Axn
- Dif. Discrim's
- Prob's of Aff. Axn: Rsns 2 Use SS
- Have 2 use racial classif.
- Innocent party
- Non V rewarded 2 incr. median of a group
- Aff Axn as Temp. Legal Remedy
- No proportionate rep. / racial balance b/c
- Soc'ly divisive
- Stigmatic injury
- Hurts innocent
- Never cease
- Other factors could cause disprop. rep.
- No soc'al discrim. 4 aff. axn b/c
- Can't find it
- Not know how 2 remedy it
- Not know when finished remedying
- Anything can B soc. discrim. if disparate effect
- Const'al Racial Classif.
- To Remedy (UC Regents v. Bakke)
- Current ID'ed intentional discrim. practices OR
- Present effects of prior ID'ed intentional discrim.
- Specif'ly ID'ed V's of Prior Discrim. Can Get Remedies
- Non V Can Get Race Based Benefits
- If member of subgroup that suffered discrim.
- When give remedy that it doesn't disprop. harm innocent
- Soc'al Discrim. Never Adeq. 4 Aff. Axn Plan
- Possible Exceptions When Soc'al Discrim. From Predicate 4
Aff. Axn Remedy
- If aff. axn vol. OR ct. ordered / barg'ed 4
- Firm basis 4 believing specif. acts of discrim. / specif.
discrim. pract's caused under rep.
- Plan temp.
- Not give remedy 4 nonV of soc'al discrim.
- Competency 2 Find Discrim.
- Ct after adjud.
- Cong. by 14th A., §5
- State & local govt's 4 own discrim. & ID'ed priv.
discrim. w/in jxn
- Reqts 4 Const'al Racial Classif.
- Compelling Int.
- Of own prior discrim. / effects of others' prior discrim.
of official / priv.
- Proof Req'ed
- Contemp. finding of actual discrim.
- Firm basis 4 belief that specif. discrim. pract's must B remedied
- Firm basis means finding probative evid. supporting that
impact is partic. discrim. aimed 2 partic. group (Croson)
- Statistically based prima facie case 4 discrim. req's using
- SS Rev. 4 State & Fed.
- Voting Rts Act & Cases
- One Person, 1 Vote
- Vote dilution when dif. people's vote not count same
- Unconst'al when consistently lwr group of voters' influence
- Intent 2 dilute voting rts
- Some actual vote dilution
- Race into acct
- As long as not predom. / sole factor
- Must use 2 remedy prior racial discrim.
- Make voting dist's contiguous & reflect voting comm. int.
- Voting Rts Act Section 2
- Govt can't use voting qualif. resulting in denial / abridgement
of voting rt b/c of race so only looking @ effect, not intent
- Discrim. Effect Viol: Totality of Circ's Test
- Viol. when b/c of race / color has lwr opp. 2 elect / partic.
b/c polit. process not ='ly open
- Must prove that min. group is
- Large & compact 2 form maj. in single member dist.
- Politically cohesive
- White maj. votes as block 2 defeat min. candidates
- Factors 4 lack of = opp.
- History of racial discrim.
- Racial polarizaton
- Use of voting pract's enhancing opp. 2 discrim.
- Effects of discrim. on ed., empl., & health 4 partic.
- Election of min. 2 office
- Polit. campaigns of racism
- Elected officials not responsive 2 min. group's needs
- Policy behind voting qualif. / pract. tenuous
- Maj. min. dist's, excl'ing proportionate rep.
- Voting Rts Act Sec. 5
- Nonretrogration Princ. 4 Proced.
- In cov'ed jxn, must get USCS of Wash. DC's decl. jgmt / AG's
preclearnce auth. saying ok 2 change voting pract., stand., etc.
- Can Sue 4
- Vote dilution
- Dist'ing predom'ly 4 racial rsn
- Fund'al Rts Under E/P
- SS Rev. 4 Three Rts: Closed List
- Rt 2 Travel / Migrate W/in US
- Rt 2 Vote
- Rt 2 Access 2 Ct
- Dif. Classif's Impinging on Fund'al Rts
- Wealth Classif.
- Durational Residency Classif.
- Rt 2 Vote
- Variable Balancing Test, Not SS 2 Rev. Laws Affecting Franchise
- State reg. severely 2 restrict rt 2 vote SS
- But if not 2 great & wants 2 advance imp. state int. by
imposing rsbl, nondiscrim. restriction, RR
- One Person 1 Vote
- Differential wt'ing scheme unConst'al so must justify deviations
from voting ='ty by showing promotes sig. state int.
- Dif. Elections
- Cong'al election req's precise = b/c can reapprotion by population
- State election can deviate from strict = if some princ'ed
policy w/10% de minimis deviation rule
- No Wealth Classif. 2 Condition Rt 2 Vote: No Poll Tax
- Spec. Dist. Election
- Can limit franchise in spec. int. election 2 those w/spec.
- Can't limit if subst'ly affects people not entitled 2 vote
like ed. (Kramer), utility bonds (Cipriano)
- If normal govt operation of spec. dist, 1 person 1 vote
- Factors 4 Spec. / Limited Int. Electoin
- Narrowness of spec. purpose
- Disprop. impact on those entitled 2 vote
- Who pays
- Volume / breadth of econ. impact not det. factor
- Limited impact on parties unentitled 2 vote not det.
- Length Reqt's
- Durational residential reqt where 1 yr. 2 long but 50 days
ok in preventing voter fraud & guarantee info 2 voter
- Voter reg. can limit 2 rsbl X & 30 days ok
- Can reg. shifting of party alliance 4 rsbl X so 11 mo. ok
but 23 mo. 2 long b/c parties have rt 2 dec. who votes in primaries
- Convicted Felons Could B Denied Vote
- Ballot Access
- State int. 4 polit. stability, prevent voter confusion, &
excl. those not mtng some threshold but
- Can't confer unfair electoral adv's on est'ed polit. parties
- Must ensure all partis "real & subst'ly = opp"
2 qualif. 4 ballot
- Threshold of 5% eligible 2 vote ok
- Freedom of ass'n 4 parties
- State can't force ass'n & party can dec. their rules by
ass. rts (La Follette & Tashjian Cases)
- Access 2 Ct
- Ability 2 Go Forward in Ct W/O Overcoming Threshold
- Wealth Classif. Impinge When Crim. So Waive Fee 4
- Rt 2 transcript 4 apeal
- Rt 2 atty 4 1st appeal as of rt
- But not princ. 2 appt atty 4 all poor by E/P so no rt 2 atty
in discretionary appeal
- Wealth Classif. & Fund'al Int. then Impinge
- Waiver fee 4 divorce b/c state monopoly & fund'al int.
- Not apply 4 bankruptcy / welfare
- Not Redist. Wealth Through E/P or D/P
- Rt 2 Travel
- Residency Reqt Infringing on Rt 2 Travel: Predicates 2 Shapiro
- Need migration from state 2 state / infring. on rt 2 travel
- Need penalty on rt 2 travel
- State denies / burdens rt 2 travel on nec. of life then viol.
rt 2 travel unless state can show compelling int. like free non-emergency
- Compelling int. not incl. save $, adm. eff., / deter fraud
claim 4 1 yr
This material is copyrighted by the author. Use of this material
for profit is strictly prohibited without written consent
from the author.
Ms. Haeji Hong
Go Back to Law School Notes
Go Back to Con Law 2 Outline