In the US, a suspect class is a group that has experienced discrimination and meets certain criteria. The level of scrutiny applied by courts to government actions violating constitutional rights varies depending on the classification. Suspect classes receive strict scrutiny, quasi-suspect classes receive intermediate scrutiny, and other cases receive rational basis review.
In the United States, a suspect class is a legal term that refers to a group that has experienced a history of discrimination. To qualify as a suspect class, a group must meet certain factors established by the US Supreme Court. Groups that don’t meet all of the factors fall into an almost suspect category. Courts use these classifications to decide what level of review to give to a government action that may violate the constitutional rights of individuals belonging to a particular class. The review levels consist of a rigorous review, a mid-term review, and a rationale.
A group that meets the following criteria is a suspect class. One, a group must have experienced a history of discrimination. Two, the group must lack political power. Three, the group must have an immutable trait such as skin color. Four, the group must be a separate and distinct minority.(
Some groups may not suit all factors. In these cases, the courts may consider the group a quasi-suspicious class. For example, the Supreme Court has classified women as a near suspect class because they have suffered a history of discrimination, have no political power, and their gender is an immutable trait. Laws that classify people based on gender, legitimacy, disability, and sexual orientation have fallen into the near-suspect category.
The classifications determine what level of review the courts must use to decide whether government action violates the constitutional rights of individuals in a particular class. For a suspect class, the court uses strict scrutiny, which is the toughest level of scrutiny. This test requires the government to demonstrate that its law or action is necessary to achieve a compelling government interest. Furthermore, the government must have no other means to achieve its goal. Most government stocks cannot survive this test; in that case, a court would find that the government is violating the US Constitution. Race, religion, and national origin usually trigger rigorous scrutiny.
For a quasi-suspicious class, the courts apply an intermediate check. This level of review requires the government to demonstrate that its action is materially related to the achievement of an important government interest. In one case, state law allowed a husband to dispose of property he co-owned with his wife without having to obtain her consent. The state could not prove that its law was substantially related to the achievement of an important government interest. As a result, the Supreme Court ruled that the state law violated the US Constitution.
Courts apply a rational basis test when other levels of review are inappropriate for a situation. Under this test, there is no constitutional violation as long as government action bears a rational relation to the attainment of any legitimate government interest. This is a tough test to fail. Unlike rigorous check and intermediate check, this test places the burden of proof on the person disputing the government action. This means that the challenger must convince a court that the government is violating the Constitution by implementing an apparently reasonable law or regulation.
Protect your devices with Threat Protection by NordVPN
