Suspect classifications and the Supreme Court
Suspect classifications refer to categories of individuals that the Supreme Court scrutinizes more closely when reviewing laws that create distinctions among people. Generally, the Court assumes that legal distinctions are rational unless they are based on characteristics associated with historical discrimination, such as race, national origin, or alienage. In such cases, laws are subject to "strict scrutiny," meaning they must serve a compelling public interest and be narrowly tailored to achieve that end. This level of scrutiny ensures that discriminatory practices are carefully examined and only permitted under specific circumstances. While race remains the primary suspect classification, the Court has occasionally extended this designation to national origin and alienage. Efforts to apply similar scrutiny to categories like gender, age, and disability have met challenges, leading to the development of intermediate classifications. This evolution reflects a nuanced approach to equal protection under the law, recognizing both benign and invidious racial classifications in contexts like affirmative action. Understanding these classifications is crucial for grasping how legal principles affect diverse communities and their treatment under the law.
Subject Terms
Suspect classifications and the Supreme Court
Definition: Categorization and differential treatment of persons by the government according to generally irrelevant characteristics that raise the suspicion of invidious discrimination.
Significance: The presence of a suspect classification triggers the Supreme Court to use strict judicial scrutiny, a demanding standard of review seldom met by state justifications.
The Supreme Court generally presumes that legal distinctions among persons regulated by public action are rational means to achieve legitimate ends. To do otherwise would require it to second-guess the complex political decisions of the democratically elected branches. Where distinctions, however, are based on patently irrelevant characteristics that have been used historically as the bases for invidious discrimination, the Supreme Court examines the law with a more exacting standard strict scrutiny. A suspect classification will not be upheld unless it serves a compelling public end through narrowly tailored means.
Although race is the quintessential suspect classification, that designation has been extended to national origin and alienage. Attempts to extend this highest level of judicial scrutiny to classifications based upon gender, illegitimacy, age, disability, sexual orientation, and economic class foundered with the demise of the liberal Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren. More solicitous treatment of these latter categories, however, especially gender and illegitimacy, indicates either the emergence of intermediate, quasi-suspect classifications or the reformulation of equal protection standards of review from a dichotomous to a continuous scale. Meanwhile affirmative action cases have held that benign as well as invidious racial classifications will be treated as suspect.