Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.


Equal Protection Clause Outline

Law Outlines > Constitutional Law (Duke Adler) Outlines

This is an extract of our Equal Protection Clause document, which we sell as part of our Constitutional Law (Duke Adler) Outlines collection written by the top tier of Duke University School Of Law students.

The following is a more accessble plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Constitutional Law (Duke Adler) Outlines. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:

Equal Protection Clause I. II. III.

EP governs: statutes, rules, unwritten policy, specific administrative decision or enforcement For State: 14A EP For FG: The constitutional basis is that SC, through reverse incorporation, found an implicit EP component in 5A (Bolling v. Sharpe)

1.1 Basic equality- RBR I.


IV. V.

RBR is the minimal level of scrutiny that all government actions challenged under EP must meet. A law meets RBR if it is rationally related to a legitimate government purpose. For fear of re-Lochnerizing, SC is very deferential in applying RBR. A law is upheld if it's possible to conceive any legitimate purpose of the law. Rationale for RBR: Basic equality: same treatment for similarly situated people in light of the totality of legitimate government goals a. Over/ under inclusive analysis: The law is neither overinclusive OI nor underinclusive UI in light of the totality legitimate government goals. Under the rational basis test the court will usually tolerate laws that are OI or UI. i. Over-inclusive: includes people who should not be burdened ii. Under-inclusive: leaves out people who in fact do threaten the state's goal b. Cost-benefit analysis i. Goals of reducing administrative costs/ substantive costs ii. Multiple governmental goals Cases where SC rejected EP- RBR challenges and uphold the laws a. Railway Express: no vehicle advertisement except the owner b. Minnesota v. Clover Leaf: bars plastic, not paper, nonreturnable containers c. Fitzgerald: Higher tax on slot machines on racetracks than riverboats d. Williamson: opticians may not prepare lenses without prescription e. Armour: rebate for future lump sum assessment not already paid Cases where SC rejected the laws under RBR a. Cleburne b. Moreno c. Romer Legitimate goals:

Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Constitutional Law (Duke Adler) Outlines.