CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
W.B. Fisch, Fall 2006
Assignment #28

Chapter 10. THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE AND THE REVIEW OF THE REASONABLENESS OF LEGISLATION

2. Social and Economic Regulatory Legislation

  • RAILWAY EXPRESS AGENCY V. NEW YORK p. 697 (1949)
    • what classification was utilized, and what was its purpose?
      • what was the purpose of the regulation as such?
      • why did the city choose the particular classification of persons subject to the regulation?
    • what objection was made to the classification's use?
      • that it was "underinclusive" in relation to its purpose?
      • that it was "overinclusive" in relation to its purpose?
    • what standard of review is applied by the Court?
  • Williamson v. Lee Optical, p. 699 (1955)
    • what is "invidious discrimination"?
    • Is it different from the use of classifications lacking a "rational basis"?
    • are "one-step-at-a-time" legislative solutions always immune from EP attack?
  • FCC V. BEACH COMMUNICATIONS, INC., p. 700 (1993)
    • what classification was utilized, for what purpose?
      • what general activity is being regulated?
      • what specific categories of this activity are exempt from regulation?
      • does the legislation articulate a purpose for the classification?
    • what standard of review is applied by the Court?
      • "ends": how does the Court determine the purposes of the classification?
      • "means": does it undertake a separate evaluation of "fit", or the relationship between the means and the end(s)?
  • Heller v. Doe, p. 704 (1993)
    • What classification, for what purpose?
    • What standard of review?
    • What are the state's interests being served by the classification?
  • Central State University v. AAUP, p. 707 (1999)
    • what classification, for what purpose?
    • did the state court purport to apply a “rational basis” test?
    • why did the Supreme Court overturn the state court’s decision?
  • Retirement Board v. Fritz, p. 708 (1980)
    • what regulation, and what purpose?
    • what standard did the Court purport to apply?
      • "rational basis"?
      • in doing so, is the Court free to speculate about Congress' purposes?
    • can a regulation survive this test, if it directly contradicts one of the stated purposes of the law?
  • Schweiker, p. 710 (1981): Medicaid recipients, as qualified for small welfare allowance?