Talk:Intermediate scrutiny

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article may be too technical for a general audience. Please help improve this article by providing more context and better explanations of technical details to make it more accessible, without removing technical details.

[edit] History of "Exceedingly Persuasive Justification?"

The article seems to imply that US v. Virginia (1996) created the "exceedingly persuasive justification" requirement, but Justice O'Connor, in delivering the opinion of the Court in Mississippi Univeristy for Women v. Hogan, 458 U.S. 718 (1982) also uses the "exceedingly persuasive justification" language:

"[T]he party seeking to uphold a statute that classifies individuals on the basis of their gender must carry the burden of showing an 'exceedingly persuasive justification' for the classification."

However, the phrase "exceedingly persuasive justification" is also placed in quotes, which may imply that she is citing an even earlier precedent. I'm not sure, but someone who knows more may care to check the facts on this one.

L3prador 00:12, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I looked at Mississippi University and O'Connor is quoting Personal Administrator of Massachusetts v. Feeney, 99 S.Ct. 2282 (1979). I took a quick peek at that case and it seems to be the one where the 'exceedingly persuasive' test was derived from Craig. See Id. at 273. Simonus 16:42, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Too Technical?

Perhaps I'm just a little tired, but this article seems far too weighted down in legal jargon to be of much use to the lay reader. The key part of the article seems to be, "Intermediate scrutiny is met if a regulation involves important governmental interests that are furthered by substantially related means." What does that mean? Additionally the examples cited don't really discuss why a certain case is an example of strict scrutiny. I'd add the {{technical}} template, but I want to make sure it's not just me. Is there consensus to do so? --Ybbor^Talk 03:12, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reaching Intermediate Scrutiny

This article should include a section dealing with when a court must apply intermediate scrutiny. It might start something like this: "Before the court applies intermediate scrutiny, it must find that a particular governmental action discriminates against a protected class. Otherwise, the court need only apply rational basis scrutiny." The section should go on to talk about de jure and de facto discrimination, and so on. --G77 (talk) 06:41, 28 January 2008 (UTC)