Also known as: rational basis standards · rational basis test · rational basis review · rational basis scrutiny
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A standard of judicial review under which a law is upheld if it is rationally related to a legitimate governmental interest. The challenger bears the burden of showing that the classification is arbitrary or irrational. Courts defer heavily to legislative judgments and uphold laws even when they are underinclusive or overinclusive.
Ronald Reed, a physically fit 51-year-old officer, challenges a state law requiring retirement at age 50. The statute survives review because the age limit need only bear a rational connection to the state's interest in maintaining a capable force. The court upholds the law despite Reed's individual fitness.
Rosa Ruiz, a national from a majority-Muslim country, sues over an executive order limiting visas on national security grounds. The order survives Establishment Clause review because it recites a security purpose rationally connected to the restrictions. Deference to the political branches in foreign affairs supports upholding the measure.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Raphael Rivera and his partner face prosecution under a statute criminalizing private same-sex conduct. The law fails rational basis review because moral disapproval alone supplies no legitimate governmental objective. The court strikes down the statute as lacking any rational connection to a valid state interest.
Renee Rogers, a parent in a low-property-wealth district, challenges a state school financing system that produces unequal per-pupil spending. The financing scheme survives equal protection review because it is rationally related to the state's interest in local control of education. The court upholds the system despite the resulting disparities.
Rhea Reynolds, a 70-year-old state judge, challenges a constitutional provision mandating retirement at that age. The provision survives review because age classifications receive rational basis scrutiny and the rule is rationally related to the state's interest in judicial competence. The court upholds the mandatory retirement rule.
Riverstone Manufacturing, an out-of-state insurer, challenges a state tax statute that favors domestic companies. The classification fails rational basis review because the state's asserted interest in promoting local business does not supply a legitimate purpose under the Equal Protection Clause. The court invalidates the discriminatory tax.
The challenger must demonstrate that the law is arbitrary or irrational. Laws are presumed valid and receive heavy deference from courts.
A classification fails when it rests on no legitimate governmental interest or when the means bear no rational relation to any conceivable legitimate purpose. Moral disapproval alone is insufficient.
Yes. Age is not a suspect or quasi-suspect class, so mandatory retirement rules and similar classifications receive rational basis review and are routinely upheld.
Courts apply at most rational basis review and accord substantial deference to the political branches. An order rationally related to national security will be upheld even when extrinsic statements suggest improper motive.
…v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc. , 473 U. S. 432, 439 (1985); see also Plyler v. Doe , 457 U. S. 202, 216 (1982). Under our rational basis standard of review, "legislation is presumed to be valid and will be sustained if the classification drawn by the statute is rationally related to a legitimate state interest." Cleburne v. Cleburne…