Constitutional Law · Intermediate Scrutiny
Clear answer to: What Is The Test For Intermediate Scrutiny in Constitutional Law? with key cases, examples, and exam tips for law students.
The test for intermediate scrutiny requires that the challenged law serves an important governmental interest and that the means chosen are substantially related to that interest.
Intermediate scrutiny is a standard of review applied by courts to evaluate laws that classify individuals based on attributes such as gender or legitimacy. It falls between strict scrutiny, which applies to laws affecting fundamental rights or suspect classifications, and rational basis review, which applies to most other legislation. Under this standard, courts will uphold a law if it serves an important government objective and the means used to achieve that objective are substantially related to it.
Importantly, the 'important governmental interest' aspect of the test requires that the interest be significant, though not necessary to be compelling as in the case of strict scrutiny. For example, legislation that addresses gender discrimination typically must serve a legitimate purpose, such as promoting equality or protecting women's health.
Moreover, the 'substantially related' prong necessitates that there be a close fit between the law's means and its ends without requiring that the law be the least restrictive alternative. Courts evaluate this prong by scrutinizing the effectiveness of the means in achieving the government's interest, allowing for some degree of flexibility.
Key cases that have shaped this doctrine include Craig v. Boren (1976), where the Supreme Court applied intermediate scrutiny to a law that differentiated based on gender; United States v. Virginia (1996), reinforcing that single-sex educational institutions must present an extremely persuasive justification for exclusion; and Reed v. Reed (1971), which established gender discrimination as an area that necessitates heightened scrutiny. Each of these cases demonstrates the particular application of intermediate scrutiny to protect against discriminatory legislative actions.
In practice, the outcome of cases under intermediate scrutiny will often depend on how well the government can justify the classification at issue, and whether courts are willing to closely examine the means employed in pursuit of that justification.
Consider a state law that requires different age minimums for males and females to obtain a driver's license. Under the intermediate scrutiny test, a court would evaluate whether this gender classification serves an important governmental interest (such as public safety) and if the age differences are substantially related to achieving that interest.
In exams, students may encounter hypothetical scenarios requiring an analysis of classifications based on gender or legitimacy, often asking for application of both the intermediate scrutiny framework and relevant case law.