Intermediate scrutiny

Definition

Intermediate scrutiny is a standard of judicial review used by courts to evaluate laws or government actions that discriminate based on certain classifications, such as gender or legitimacy. This level of scrutiny requires that the law in question serve an important governmental interest and be substantially related to achieving that interest, balancing the need for regulation against individual rights.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. Intermediate scrutiny applies specifically to cases involving quasi-suspect classifications, such as gender, meaning that laws must be evaluated more closely than under rational basis review but not as stringently as under strict scrutiny.
2. Courts often look for evidence that the government has a significant interest in regulating the subject matter when applying intermediate scrutiny.
3. In commercial speech cases, the application of intermediate scrutiny means that regulations must not only serve an important governmental interest but also be proportionate and directly related to that interest.
4. This standard is often invoked in cases involving gender discrimination, where laws must be justified by an important state interest and be substantially related to achieving that objective.
5. Intermediate scrutiny is essential for balancing the government's need to legislate against protecting individual rights, making it a key part of constitutional law analysis.

Review Questions

• How does intermediate scrutiny differ from strict scrutiny and rational basis review in terms of its application and requirements?
  • Intermediate scrutiny sits between strict scrutiny and rational basis review. It requires that a law or government action serve an important governmental interest and be substantially related to that interest, which is more demanding than rational basis review but less so than strict scrutiny. Strict scrutiny demands a compelling governmental interest and narrow tailoring, while rational basis only requires a legitimate interest with a rational connection to the law. This difference is crucial in determining how courts assess regulations impacting different classifications.
• In what ways does intermediate scrutiny apply specifically to commercial speech regulations compared to other types of speech?
  • Intermediate scrutiny applies to commercial speech by requiring that regulations serve an important governmental interest while also being directly related and not overly broad. This contrasts with other forms of speech, such as political speech, which often receive greater protection under strict scrutiny. In essence, while the government can regulate commercial speech more readily than other speech types, it still must justify such regulations with substantial evidence linking the regulation to a significant purpose.
• Evaluate the implications of using intermediate scrutiny for gender discrimination cases in shaping legal standards for equality.
  • Using intermediate scrutiny for gender discrimination cases has profound implications for establishing legal standards regarding equality. It recognizes that gender is a classification warranting more protection than benign categories but less than race or fundamental rights. This framework influences how courts interpret and enforce laws affecting gender equity, shaping societal norms by holding governments accountable for their discriminatory practices while still allowing for some level of regulation. The ongoing evaluation of this standard can lead to shifts in how gender discrimination is perceived and addressed within legal contexts.

Related terms

strict scrutiny: The highest level of scrutiny applied by courts, requiring laws to serve a compelling governmental interest and to be narrowly tailored to achieve that interest.

rational basis review: The lowest standard of judicial review, where laws are upheld if they have a legitimate government interest and are rationally related to that interest.

commercial speech:

Any speech that proposes a commercial transaction, which receives a lower level of protection under the First Amendment than other types of speech.