On May 31, 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Massachusetts v. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services held Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional. In doing so, the court declined to extend heightened scrutiny to sexual preference classifications and instead relied on a more searching form of rational basis review. This Comment argues that the First Circuit’s equal protection analysis is flawed because it purports to apply Supreme Court precedent, but fails to do so faithfully. It also argues that the court could have reached the same result and more effectively insulated its holding from attack by designating sexual orientation a suspect or quasi-suspect classification
The Supreme Court decision in Maher v. Roe, denying an equal protection claim to Medicaid payments f...
Historically, the rational basis test has been a constitutional rubber stamp. In Eldred v. Ashcroft ...
The rational basis test is not only constitutional but also desirable. Nothing in the Constitution r...
On May 31, 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Massachusetts v. U.S. Department...
We stand at a crossroads in equal protection doctrine. Over the last 20 years, the Supreme Court has...
In this amicus brief filed in United States v. Windsor, pending before the Supreme Court, amici cons...
In many different cases, the Supreme Court and lower courts have used a rigorous form of rational ba...
It is commonplace today to associate rational basis review exclusively with groups that are not form...
This Article suggests that there is Proper Methodology that courts apply when reviewing cases at the...
In striking the ban on same-sex marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court avoided tiers of...
On January 21, 2014, in SmithKline v. Abbott, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held t...
This Article examines the standard of scrutiny courts should apply when testing the validity of laws...
On February 10, Nevada\u27s Democratic attorney general decided to stop defending the state\u27s con...
When the U.S. Supreme Court declared that same-sex marriage would be legal throughout the country, t...
This article explores a line of Supreme Court cases that have struck down state laws using a rigorou...
The Supreme Court decision in Maher v. Roe, denying an equal protection claim to Medicaid payments f...
Historically, the rational basis test has been a constitutional rubber stamp. In Eldred v. Ashcroft ...
The rational basis test is not only constitutional but also desirable. Nothing in the Constitution r...
On May 31, 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Massachusetts v. U.S. Department...
We stand at a crossroads in equal protection doctrine. Over the last 20 years, the Supreme Court has...
In this amicus brief filed in United States v. Windsor, pending before the Supreme Court, amici cons...
In many different cases, the Supreme Court and lower courts have used a rigorous form of rational ba...
It is commonplace today to associate rational basis review exclusively with groups that are not form...
This Article suggests that there is Proper Methodology that courts apply when reviewing cases at the...
In striking the ban on same-sex marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court avoided tiers of...
On January 21, 2014, in SmithKline v. Abbott, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held t...
This Article examines the standard of scrutiny courts should apply when testing the validity of laws...
On February 10, Nevada\u27s Democratic attorney general decided to stop defending the state\u27s con...
When the U.S. Supreme Court declared that same-sex marriage would be legal throughout the country, t...
This article explores a line of Supreme Court cases that have struck down state laws using a rigorou...
The Supreme Court decision in Maher v. Roe, denying an equal protection claim to Medicaid payments f...
Historically, the rational basis test has been a constitutional rubber stamp. In Eldred v. Ashcroft ...
The rational basis test is not only constitutional but also desirable. Nothing in the Constitution r...