All of this suggests that elevated intermediate scrutiny should apply.I like the result, but to quote Indiana Jones:
Saturday, February 3, 2018
This Standards of Scrutiny Thing is a Game
Standards of scrutiny are a series of tests used by the courts to strike down laws they don't like and leave intact the laws they do like. Strict scrutiny requires compelling governmental interest and neither overinclusive or underinclusive in its application; intermediate scrutiny apparently exists to strike down some laws that distinguish based on sex but not others. Rational scrutiny says law makers are either crazy (or gays say that they are as in Romer v. Evans). People v,. Chairez (Ill. 2018) struck down a ban on firearms possession with 1000 feet of a park based on D.C. v. Heller (2008):
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Shouldn't Intermediate Elevated Rational Basis Strict Scrutiny apply?
ReplyDelete