Also known as: facially race-neutral · facial race neutrality · facially neutral as to race · facially neutral · race-neutral on its face
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A law or policy that does not explicitly classify individuals by race on its face. Such a measure receives rational-basis review rather than strict scrutiny unless a challenger proves that the government adopted it with a discriminatory purpose.
The City of Rock Hill awards supervisory kitchen positions at its privatized courthouse facility only to applicants with prior military mess-hall experience. Several experienced female staff members at West Bistro lose their jobs to male veterans. The city adopted the rule to reward military service rather than to exclude women.
Seattle School District No. 1 assigns students to high schools using tiebreakers based on whether a student lives near a school and on the racial composition of the school's current enrollment. The plan never classifies any individual student by race on an application form. Parents Involved in Community Schools challenges the plan as an unconstitutional racial classification.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
The City of New Haven requires all lieutenant candidates to pass a written test before advancing. The test produces a racially disparate pass rate. City officials discard the results after learning the racial breakdown. Ricci and other high-scoring white candidates sue, claiming the city's action was race-based.
The Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District draws attendance boundaries that effectively place all Hasidic children in one district while leaving neighboring districts with virtually no Hasidic students. The boundaries contain no explicit religious classification. Parents outside the district challenge the arrangement.
Santa Fe Independent School District permits students to elect a speaker to deliver a pre-game invocation at football games. The policy contains no reference to religion. A group of parents sues, alleging that the election process nevertheless endorses religion.
Bob Jones University maintains a policy against interracial dating and marriage for its students. The university's written rules contain no explicit racial classification. The IRS revokes the university's tax-exempt status on the ground that the policy violates public policy against racial discrimination.
A facially race-neutral policy triggers strict scrutiny only when a challenger proves that the government adopted or maintained the policy with a discriminatory purpose. Disparate impact alone is insufficient.
No. Awareness of a racially disparate impact combined with a refusal to change the policy does not by itself prove that officials acted because of race rather than for a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason.
A veterans-preference rule that disproportionately excludes women is constitutional when the government adopts it to reward military service rather than to discriminate against women. The disparate gender impact does not invalidate the policy absent proof of discriminatory intent.
…Supremacy." Id. , at 6, 11. A racially discriminatory purpose is always sufficient to subject a law to strict scrutiny, even a facially neutral law that makes no mention of race. See Washington v. Davis , 426 U. S. 229, 241-242 (1976). No purpose to discriminate against men or women as a class can be gleaned from the Texas law, so…