Also known as: closely scrutinized · close scrutiny · strict scrutiny · heightened scrutiny
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A standard of judicial review applied to governmental action that burdens fundamental rights or employs suspect classifications. The government must demonstrate that the action is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling interest.
The City of Miami enacted an ordinance that singled out the ritual slaughter of animals practiced by members of the Santeria faith. Cynthia Cortez, a practitioner, sought to perform the ritual at her home but faced enforcement. The court applied close judicial scrutiny because the ordinance targeted religious conduct and lacked a compelling justification unrelated to suppressing the faith.
The City of Richmond required that thirty percent of city construction contracts be awarded to minority-owned businesses. Caleb Chang, a non-minority contractor, challenged the program after losing a bid. The court subjected the racial preference to close judicial scrutiny and struck it down for lacking evidence of specific past discrimination in the local industry.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Philadelphia adopted a policy requiring foster agencies to certify same-sex couples. Caitlin Crowley operated a religious agency that declined on faith grounds. The court applied close judicial scrutiny because the policy allowed individualized exemptions yet refused one for religious reasons and could not satisfy the demanding standard.
Connecticut prohibited the use of contraceptives by married couples. Craig Caldwell and his wife sought medical advice from Catherine Carter but were denied under the statute. The court applied close judicial scrutiny to the law because it directly invaded the fundamental right of marital privacy.
The City of New London condemned private homes for a redevelopment project that included private commercial uses. Claire Campbell, a homeowner, challenged the taking. The court reviewed whether the public-use justification satisfied constitutional requirements under the Takings Clause.
Congress imposed limits on soft-money contributions to political parties. Continental Bank sought to make such contributions but was barred by the statute. The court reviewed whether the restrictions were narrowly tailored to prevent corruption.
Close judicial scrutiny applies when a law burdens a fundamental right or employs a suspect classification such as race or alienage. The government then bears the burden of showing a compelling interest and narrow tailoring. Laws that are content-based or target religious practice also receive this level of review.
Supporting sources
Close judicial scrutiny demands a compelling governmental interest and narrow tailoring. Intermediate scrutiny requires only an important interest and substantial relation to that interest. Gender classifications and certain content-neutral speech regulations receive intermediate scrutiny instead.
Supporting sources
The government must identify a compelling interest that is actually served by the law. It must also show that the law is narrowly tailored, meaning no less restrictive alternatives exist. Failure on either prong invalidates the law.
Supporting sources
No. Disparate impact alone does not trigger close judicial scrutiny. The challenger must show that the government acted with discriminatory purpose or that the law burdens a fundamental right. Purposeful discrimination or a fundamental-rights burden is required.
Supporting sources
…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…