Also known as:rational-basis · rational basis test · rational basis review · rational basis scrutiny
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
A standard of judicial review under which legislation or government action is upheld if it bears a rational relationship to a legitimate governmental interest. Courts applying this standard presume the validity of the challenged measure and defer to legislative judgments about the existence of supporting facts.
See Our Sources
How its tested
Common Examples
6
Visa Restriction Upheld
The President issues an order temporarily halting visas for construction workers from several majority-Muslim nations after intelligence reports flag sabotage risks to ports and military facilities. A foreign architecture firm sues, citing presidential statements questioning Muslim loyalty. The court applies rational basis review and upholds the order because its stated national-security purpose is legitimate and the temporary restriction is rationally connected to protecting infrastructure projects.
Permissive Inference Sustained
Rhea Reynolds is charged with drug possession after police find narcotics in a car she owns but was not driving. The prosecution relies on a statutory presumption that the owner of a vehicle containing drugs knowingly possesses them. The court upholds the presumption under rational basis review because a rational juror could find the inferred fact from the proven facts.
County Court of Ulster County, N. Y. v. Allen442 U.S. 140 (S.Ct.1979)
In March 1973, three adult male respondents and a sixteen-year-old girl were traveling in a Chevrolet on the New York State Thruway when the car was stopped for speeding. Police observed two loaded handguns weighing approximately six pounds in an open handbag on the front floor or seat beside the girl, who admitted the bag belonged to her. A machinegun and heroin were discovered in the trunk after it was pried open.
The four were tried together in Ulster County Court for possession of the handguns and trunk items. The trial judge instructed the jury regarding the statutory presumption that the presence of firearms in the automobile constituted evidence of possession by all occupants. The jury found the three adult males guilty of handgun possession but acquitted everyone of the trunk charges. The convictions were affirmed by the Appellate Division without opinion. The New York Court of Appeals also affirmed.
The respondents sought federal habeas corpus relief in the Southern District of New York. The district court granted the writ on the ground that the presumption could not support the convictions on these facts. The Second Circuit affirmed the grant of the writ, though on the basis that the statute was unconstitutional on its face.
The Supreme Court granted certiorari to consider the procedural and substantive issues raised by the lower federal courts' decisions.
A police officer challenges a department grooming standard that prohibits beards. The court applies rational basis review because no fundamental right is implicated. The regulation survives because it is reasonably related to the legitimate interests of discipline and uniformity.
Presumption Upheld for Convenience
A widow is denied Social Security benefits because her marriage occurred within nine months of the wage earner’s death. The statute presumes such marriages were entered to obtain benefits. The court upholds the irrebuttable presumption under rational basis review because administrative convenience and anti-fraud goals supply a legitimate purpose.
Illegitimacy Classification Struck
Rebecca Ross's child is denied inheritance rights under a statute that bars illegitimate children from inheriting from their father unless paternity was formally adjudicated before death. The court applies rational basis review but invalidates the classification because it is not rationally related to any legitimate state interest in orderly estate administration.
Trimble v. Gordon430 U.S. 762, 775 n.16 (1977)
Deta Mona Trimble is the illegitimate daughter of Jessie Trimble and Sherman Gordon. Trimble and Gordon lived together in Chicago with Deta Mona from 1970 until Gordon died in 1974 as the victim of a homicide. On January 2, 1973, the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, entered a paternity order finding Gordon to be the father of Deta Mona and ordering him to pay fifteen dollars per week for her support. Gordon thereafter supported Deta Mona in accordance with the paternity order and openly acknowledged her as his child.
Gordon died intestate at the age of twenty-eight, leaving an estate consisting only of a 1974 Plymouth automobile worth approximately twenty-five hundred dollars. Shortly after Gordon's death, Trimble, as the mother and next friend of Deta Mona, filed a petition for letters of administration, determination of heirship, and declaratory relief in the Probate Division of the Circuit Court of Cook County. That court entered an order determining heirship, identifying as the only heirs of Gordon his father Joseph Gordon, his mother Ethel King, and his brother, two sisters, and a half brother. The Circuit Court excluded Deta Mona on the authority of section twelve of the Illinois Probate Act.
The Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Circuit Court on the authority of its earlier decision in In re Estate of Karas. The United States Supreme Court noted probable jurisdiction to consider the arguments that section twelve violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by invidiously discriminating on the basis of illegitimacy and sex.
Ruby Rivera, a state transit employee, sues under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act for age-based denial of promotion. The court holds that Congress lacked power under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to abrogate state sovereign immunity because age classifications receive only rational basis review and the statute was not congruent and proportional to any pattern of unconstitutional state conduct.
4 common questions
Students Frequently Ask...
What level of scrutiny does rational basis review impose on economic or social legislation?
Rational basis review requires only that the law be rationally related to a legitimate governmental interest. Courts presume validity and will uphold the measure even if it is underinclusive or overinclusive, so long as some conceivable rational basis exists.
Does rational basis review apply to classifications based on age or disability?
Yes. Age and disability classifications receive rational basis review. Congress therefore lacks Section 5 power to abrogate state sovereign immunity for claims under statutes like the ADEA or Title I of the ADA unless it identifies a pattern of irrational state discrimination and enacts congruent and proportional remedies.
Can a law survive rational basis review even if underinclusive or overinclusive?
Yes. Under rational basis review a law may be underinclusive or overinclusive provided it is rationally related to a legitimate purpose. A city ordinance banning most vehicle advertisements but allowing owners to advertise their own businesses was upheld as a permissible first step toward reducing traffic distractions.
How does rational basis review interact with the Establishment Clause in immigration cases?
In immigration and foreign affairs, courts apply at most rational basis review. An executive order restricting entry from several majority-Muslim countries survives an Establishment Clause challenge when the order states a legitimate national-security purpose and is rationally related to that purpose, even if some statements suggest religious animus.
505 U.S. 833, 112 S. Ct. 2791, 120 L. Ed. 2d 674 (1992)
…essence of my position, I will not swell the United States Reports with repetition of what I have said before; and applying the rational basis test, I would uphold the Pennsylvania statute in its entirety. I must, however, respond to a few of the more outrageous arguments in today's opinion, which it is beyond human nature to leave…