As we have discussed in relation toLippmanCh. 2 on the“Constitutional Limits” to U.S criminal law, in the era in the aftermath of WW II, the Equal Protection Clause of the 1868Reconstruction-Era 14thAmendment to the US Constitution was revitalized by the blood of Civil Rights Movementactivism, led by M.L. King and others in the streets (discussed in Wednesday’s lecture)and by Thurgood Marshall and his colleagues in the courts. The 14thAmendment’s Equal Protection Clause has become key to efforts to establish federal Constitutional guidelines for criminal law at both federal and state levels. In the post-WW II era, federal appellate courts interpreted the14thAmendment’spromise of “equal protection of the laws” to apply not only to formerly enslaved people during the post-Civil War era.Under Chief Justice Earl Warren, the U.S, Supreme Court, Equal Protection Doctrine was greatly expanded to categories of people and realms of life unforeseen earlier.
We have learned that there are now“three levels of constitutional scrutiny” that courts are supposed to apply. This is therefore a three-part review question, asking for a three-paragraph response:
i.State what “strict scrutiny” means. Give an example of an actual case (not just copying our textbook) or a hypothetical case that exemplifies “strict scrutiny,” briefly saying why your example shows what “strict scrutiny” means.
ii.State what “rational basis” or minimum scrutiny” means. Give an actual or hypothetical example, briefly saying why your exampleshowsthe meaning of this term.
iii.State what “intermediate scrutiny” or “heightened scrutiny” means. This level is murkier, so please just try to convey your understanding in one paragraph. Yes, you are completely free to say why you think that this Is a less-than-clearly-defined category.Please bear in mind that this is an exercise for review and for attendance purposes. Please just submit a good-faith effort by Sunday at 6:00 PM if you wish to remain enrolled in this course