Also known as: deferential standards of review · deference · deferential review
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A judicial posture of restraint that upholds official action if rationally related to a legitimate governmental interest. The posture requires courts to accept the determinations of the political branches or administrative decision makers unless the challenger shows a clear constitutional violation or arbitrary conduct.
Alpha Framing challenged an executive order barring entry of construction workers from several majority-Muslim nations. The order recited national-security risks to infrastructure projects in State A. The district court applied rational-basis review and upheld the order because the stated purpose was legitimate and the restriction was rationally connected to it.
An assistant district attorney circulated a petition protesting internal transfer policies. The district attorney fired the employee after concluding the petition would disrupt office operations. The court deferred to the employer's assessment and upheld the termination because the speech concerned only workplace grievances.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
The state commission banned promotional advertising by electric utilities to conserve energy. Central Hudson challenged the ban as violating commercial-speech protections. The court applied intermediate scrutiny but gave weight to the commission's factual findings on energy conservation and upheld the restriction.
The coastal commission required the Nollans to grant a public-access easement as a condition of rebuilding their beachfront home. The Nollans argued the condition lacked a sufficient nexus to their project. The court deferred to the commission's findings on increased beach demand and upheld the easement requirement.
Connecticut prosecuted a married couple and their physician for using contraceptives in violation of a state statute. The couple argued the law invaded a fundamental liberty interest. The court declined to defer to the legislature and invalidated the statute because it lacked any rational connection to a legitimate state purpose.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission adopted a rule on spent-fuel storage without additional environmental-impact hearings. Environmental groups challenged the rule as arbitrary. The court deferred to the agency's technical expertise and upheld the rule because the record showed a rational basis for the commission's conclusions.
A court applies a deferential standard when the challenged action involves immigration, foreign affairs, or routine administrative or employment decisions that do not implicate fundamental rights. The court then asks only whether the action is rationally related to a legitimate governmental interest.
Supporting sources
Deference applies primarily to factual findings and discretionary policy judgments. Legal conclusions about the meaning of constitutional provisions receive no deference and are reviewed de novo.
Supporting sources
No. When the order or action states a legitimate purpose on its face and is rationally related to that purpose, courts applying a deferential standard uphold the action even if extrinsic statements suggest an improper motive.
Supporting sources
…must be changed from time to time and that this Court is charged with a duty to make those changes. For myself, I must with all deference reject that philosophy. The Constitution makers knew the need for change and provided for it. Amendments suggested by the people's elected representatives can be submitted to the people or…