We've found 9 Equal Protection Clause tests

AP Government Civil Rights Act Of 1964 Equal Protection Clause Equal Protection Under The Law Full Faith And Credit Men And Women Sexual Harassment In The Workplace Voting Rights Act Of 1965
POS module 5 quiz – Flashcards 28 terms
Kenneth Wheeler avatar
Kenneth Wheeler
28 terms
Affirmative Action Policies AP Government Civil Rights Act Of 1875 Civil Rights Act Of 1964 Equal Protection Clause Equal Protection Under The Law Jim Crow Laws
TestBank Edwards Ch 5 – Flashcards 90 terms
Margaret Bruce avatar
Margaret Bruce
90 terms
Equal Protection Clause Federal Election Campaign Act
6. The Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s – Flashcards 31 terms
Linda Lynch avatar
Linda Lynch
31 terms
1980s And 1990s Affordable Care Act AP Government Equal Protection Clause State Department Of Education Texas Supreme Court
GOVT 2306 Chap 12 – Flashcards 40 terms
Brandon Ruffin avatar
Brandon Ruffin
40 terms
AP Government Constitutional Law Due Process Clause Equal Protection Clause Substantive Due Process
7.5.2Test (CST): Civil Liberties and Civil Rights – Flashcards 30 terms
Joan Grant avatar
Joan Grant
30 terms
Business Law Constitutional Convention Of 1787 Equal Protection Clause Rational Basis Test
law module 3 ch 5 quiz – Flashcards 47 terms
Gabriela Compton avatar
Gabriela Compton
47 terms
Abnormal Psychology AP Government Constitutional Law Equal Protection Clause Free Exercise Clause Rational Basis Test United States Government-Comprehensive
Chapter 13 Study Worksheet – Flashcards 21 terms
William Hopper avatar
William Hopper
21 terms
Criminal Justice Equal Protection Clause Released From Prison
CJS 411 (Final) : Chapter 9 – Flashcards 85 terms
Jessica Forbes avatar
Jessica Forbes
85 terms
Business Law Constitutional Law Equal Protection Clause State And Federal Laws
Chp 5 – ?onstitution Flashcards 40 terms
Millie Miller avatar
Millie Miller
40 terms
it found that other voting rights were protected by the constitution such as the 14th amendement which is the equal protection clause.
what was the impact of the hill vs stone court case?
More test answers on https://studyhippo.com/ch-6-sect-1/
The question of how the equal protection clause will be applied in the specific circumstances of discrimination on the basis of race is known as
strict scrutiny test
More test answers on https://studyhippo.com/nat-gov-chapter-15/
The 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause “strict scrutiny” test will be used when the legislation: a. affects a person’s right to vote. b. differentiates on the basis of race. c. affects an person’s income. d. affects a person’s right to drive.
b. differentiates on the basis of race.
More test answers on https://studyhippo.com/blaw-ch-5/
For which of the following would the Supreme Court most likely apply an “intermediate scrutiny” standard of review to determine whether the policy is an unconstitutional violation of the equal protection clause?
having different minimum ages for men and women to marry
More test answers on https://studyhippo.com/pos-module-5-quiz/
Equal Protection Clause; what amendment is this? How is it related to judicial review? What are the levels of scrutiny?
the 14th amendment; “No State shall … deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” which means that Governments must treat people equally! Unfair classifications among people or corporations will not be permitted, such as racial discrimination. Our fundamental rights are PROTECTED by the Due Process Clause in the 14th amendment. However, the govt makes classifications every day. There are 3 categories of classifications: 1) minimal scrutiny; classifies ppl into economic or social categories; to be upheld, it must be RATIONALLY related to a legitimate goal. They’re almost always upheld 2) Intermediate scrutiny; Gender-based classification; these are sometimes upheld; must have an exceedingly persuasive justification (good reason) to be upheld. Private school’s aren’t a part of the govt, so they can classify by gender bc they dont’ get protection from the Equal Protection Clause. However, To keep a girl off an all boys team at a public high school, the school would have to prove that doing so substantially relates to an important government objective. 3) strict scrutiny; Race, Ethnicity, Fundamental Rights; almost never upheld; Any govt action that discriminates against racial/ethnic minorities or interferes with fundamental rights is invalid. In such cases, courts will look at statute/policy w/ Strict Scrutiny. How does a law pass a strict scrutiny test? – It must be justified by a compelling govt interest – That law/policy must be NARROWLY TAILORED to achieve that goal/interest, meaning its written to specifically fulfill only its intended goals – Law/policy must be the least restrictive means for achieving that interest
More test answers on https://studyhippo.com/blaw-week-12/
According to the Fourteenth Amendment, we are all entitled to certain civil liberties under the Equal Protection Clause. This means that
you cannot be legally discriminated against.
More test answers on https://studyhippo.com/polisci-chpt-4/
To determine whether a law violates the Equal Protection Clause, courts use one of three standards to “test” whether a person has been inhibited from exercising a fundamental right.
Intermediate scrutiny, Rational basis test, and Strict scrutiny
More test answers on https://studyhippo.com/chapter-4-business-law/
Which clause states that the Constitution, and federal statutes and treaties, shall be the supreme law of the land. a. Supremacy Clause b. Equal Protection Clause c. Takings Clause d. Commerce Clause
Mississippi Univ. Women v Hogan (1981) Joe Hogan, a registered nurse and qualified applicant, was denied admission to the Mississippi University for Women School of Nursing’s baccalaureate program on the basis of sex. Created by a state statute in 1884, MUW was the oldest state-supported all-female college in the United States. -Did the state statute which prevented men from enrolling in MUW violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
Yes. The Court held that the state did not provide an “exceedingly persuasive justification” for the gender-based distinction. The state’s primary argument, that the policy constituted educational affirmative action for women, was “unpersuasive” to the Court since women traditionally have not lacked opportunities to enter nursing. If anything, argued Justice O’Connor, the statute “tends to perpetuate the stereotyped view of nursing as an exclusively women’s job.”
More test answers on https://studyhippo.com/politicial-science/
Get an explanation on any task
Get unstuck with the help of our AI assistant in seconds