The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment prohibits states from denying any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law. In other words, the laws of a state must treat an individual in the same manner as other people in similar conditions and circumstances. A violation would occur, for example, if a state prohibited an individual from entering into an employment contract because he or she was a member of a particular race.
The clause is not intended to provide equality among individuals or classes but only equal application of the law. The result of a law, therefore, is not relevant so long as there is no discrimination in its application. By denying states the ability to discriminate, the Equal Protection Clause is crucial to the protection of civil rights.
Generally, the question of whether the Equal Protection Clause has been violated arises when a state grants a particular class of individuals the right to engage in an activity yet denies other individuals the same right. There is no clear rule for deciding when a classification is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court has dictated the application of different tests depending on the type of classification and its effect on fundamental rights.
Traditionally, the Court finds a state classification constitutional if it has a “rational basis” to a “legitimate state purpose.” The Court, however, has applied more stringent analysis in certain cases. It will “strictly scrutinize” a distinction when it embodies a “suspect classification.” In order for a classification to be subject to strict scrutiny, it must be shown that the state law or its administration is meant to discriminate. Usually, if a purpose to discriminate is found, the classification will be strictly scrutinized if it is based on race, national origin or, in some situations, citizenship. In order for a classification to be found permissible, the state must prove that there is a compelling interest to the law and that the classification is necessary to further that interest.
The Court also will apply this test if the classification interferes with fundamental rights, such as First Amendment rights, the right to privacy or the right to travel. The Court also requires states to show more than a rational basis (though it does not apply the strict-scrutiny test) for classifications based on gender or a child’s status as illegitimate.
The 14th Amendment is not by its terms applicable to the federal government. Actions by the federal government, however, that classify individuals in a discriminatory manner will, under similar circumstances, violate the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
While most drivers are safe and aim to obey the rules, some have some unsafe habits and violate road rules in ways that ... Read More
Court Denies Access to Green Card for Couple Who Entered Country Illegally In a rare unanimous decision on the volatile... Read More
There are numerous ways that someone can lose their house in a divorce, with the most common reason being that the house... Read More
How It Works