Explain the various standards used by the courts when laws treat people differently. What are the three legal classifications, and which groups fall under those classifications? What standard of review does the court apply for each classification? What question does the court ask when reviewing whether a law is constitutional for each classification? What is the usual outcome for a law when going through each process of review?

What will be an ideal response?

Ans: Laws may classify people by race, gender, and age or income. When a law classifies people by race, the classification is suspect, and the Court subjects the law to a strict scrutiny standard of review and asks if there is a compelling state purpose for this classification. When a law classifies people by race, the law is usually struck down. If a law classifies people by gender, the classification is quasi-suspect and is subject to an intermediate standard of review, and the Court asks if there is an important state purpose for the classification. Generally, if a law classifies people by gender, the law may be struck down or it may stand. When a law classifies people by age or gender, the classification is non-suspect and is subject to a minimum rationality standard of review, whereby the Court asks if there is a rational basis for the classification. Such laws are usually upheld.