Also known as:strict-scrutiny · strict scrutiny test · strict scrutiny standard
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A standard of judicial review under which a law burdening a suspect classification or fundamental right is upheld only if the government proves it is necessary to serve a compelling governmental interest and is narrowly tailored to that interest.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
6
Religious Slaughter Ordinance Challenged
Santiago Sanchez, a Santeria priest, sought to perform animal sacrifices central to his faith in a city that enacted an ordinance banning the precise method used in those rituals. The ordinance singled out the religious practice while leaving other forms of animal slaughter untouched. A court applied strict scrutiny because the law was not neutral or generally applicable and struck it down after the city failed to show the measure was necessary to any compelling interest.
Minority Contractor Set-Aside Program
Sabrina Shah, owner of a non-minority construction firm, challenged a city ordinance reserving a fixed percentage of public contracts for minority-owned businesses. The program rested on general assertions of past societal discrimination rather than evidence of specific discrimination by the city in the local industry. Strict scrutiny applied and the set-aside failed because the city could not demonstrate a compelling interest supported by particularized findings or narrow tailoring.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Cases
Casebooks
Hornbooks
Course Outlines
Study Supplements
Dictionaries
Foster Agency Exemption Policy
Stella Shapiro operated a religiously affiliated foster agency that declined to certify same-sex couples on faith-based grounds. The city allowed case-by-case exemptions from its nondiscrimination rule for secular agencies but refused to extend the same flexibility to religious ones. Strict scrutiny was triggered because the policy permitted individualized exemptions, and the city could not satisfy the standard.
Disparaging Trademark Ban
Simone Sanders attempted to register a trademark containing a term some found offensive. A federal statute barred registration of marks deemed disparaging. The restriction constituted viewpoint discrimination against private speech and was subjected to strict scrutiny, which it could not survive.
Contraception Access Restriction
Sophia Singh and her husband sought contraceptive advice from a state clinic but were told state law criminalized distribution to married couples. The restriction directly burdened the fundamental right to marital privacy. Strict scrutiny applied and the law was invalidated because the state could not prove it was necessary to serve any compelling interest.
Same-Sex Marriage Recognition
Seth Shapiro and his same-sex spouse applied for marriage-related benefits in a state that refused to recognize their out-of-state marriage. The refusal burdened the fundamental right to marry. Strict scrutiny was required and the non-recognition policy failed because the state lacked a compelling justification narrowly tailored to any legitimate objective.
Common questions
Frequently Asked
4
What classifications or rights trigger strict scrutiny?+
Strict scrutiny applies to laws that discriminate on the basis of race or national origin and to laws that burden fundamental rights such as marriage, procreation, and certain privacy interests. The government must then prove the classification or burden is necessary to a compelling interest and narrowly tailored.
How does strict scrutiny differ from intermediate scrutiny?+
Strict scrutiny demands a compelling governmental interest and narrow tailoring, while intermediate scrutiny requires only an important governmental objective and a substantial relationship to that objective. Gender classifications receive intermediate scrutiny. Racial classifications receive strict scrutiny.
Does strict scrutiny apply to federal alienage classifications?+
No. Federal alienage classifications receive rational-basis review because Congress possesses plenary power over immigration. State alienage classifications, by contrast, generally trigger strict scrutiny.
What must the government show to survive strict scrutiny?+
The government must demonstrate both that the interest is compelling and that the means chosen are necessary and narrowly tailored, leaving no less restrictive alternative that would achieve the same end.
576 U.S. 644 (2015)Legislation and Regulation
…law restricting marriage to opposite-sex couples constituted a classification on the basis of sex and was therefore subject to strict scrutiny under the Hawaii Constitution. Baehr v. Lewin , 74 Haw. 530, 852 P. 2d 44. Although this decision did not mandate that same-sex marriage be allowed, some States were concerned by its…