What is Strict Scrutiny Test?
A form of judicial review that courts use to determine the constitutionality of certain laws that on their face raise problematic suggestions of potential abuse or discriminatory intent. To pass strict scrutiny, the legislature must have passed the law to further a "compelling governmental interest," and must have narrowly tailored the law to achieve that interest.
Detailed Examples and Case Studies
Examples of the Strict Scrutiny Test in Judicial Review
- Affirmative Action: In Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, the Supreme Court applied strict scrutiny to determine whether the university's affirmative action policy, which aimed to increase minority student enrollment, served a compelling governmental interest and was narrowly tailored to achieve that interest.
- Freedom of Speech: In Texas v. Johnson, the Supreme Court used strict scrutiny to evaluate a law prohibiting flag desecration. The court found that the law did not serve a compelling governmental interest and struck it down as unconstitutional.
- Voting Rights: In Shaw v. Reno, the Supreme Court applied strict scrutiny to a North Carolina redistricting plan that created majority-minority districts. The court ruled that the plan must be narrowly tailored to serve a compelling interest in avoiding racial gerrymandering.
Case Studies
| Case | Issue | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| Regents of the University of California v. Bakke | Affirmative Action | The court ruled that while affirmative action serves a compelling interest, the specific program was not narrowly tailored. |
| Texas v. Johnson | Freedom of Speech | The law against flag desecration was struck down as it did not serve a compelling governmental interest. |
| Shaw v. Reno | Voting Rights | The redistricting plan was not narrowly tailored to serve a compelling interest, thus violating the Constitution. |
Importance of the Strict Scrutiny Test
The strict scrutiny test is a critical tool in judicial review used to protect fundamental rights and prevent discriminatory practices. By requiring laws to serve a compelling governmental interest and be narrowly tailored to achieve that interest, courts ensure that individual rights are not infringed upon unnecessarily. This test is often applied in cases involving race, religion, and fundamental freedoms, ensuring that any governmental action that potentially infringes on these rights is thoroughly justified and precisely executed.
Further Reading
For more detailed information, see our related Constitutional Law terms:
Pass the Bar, Guaranteed
BarPrepHero Premium offers the most complete collection of real bar exam questions licensed directly from NCBE (the organization that writes the exam).