Also known as: discriminatory purposes · discriminatory intent
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
The mental state of a government decisionmaker who adopts or maintains a facially neutral policy at least in part because of its adverse effect on a protected class. Proof of this intent is required to establish an equal protection violation when a law produces a disparate impact but contains no explicit classification.
Darius Dixon, a city personnel director, adopts a veterans preference for firefighter hiring to reward military service. The policy results in far fewer women being hired than men. Danielle Dixon sues, claiming gender discrimination. The court upholds the policy because the preference was chosen to benefit veterans, not to exclude women.
The police department adopts a written aptitude test for new officers. Delilah Duran and other minority applicants fail at substantially higher rates than white applicants. Duran sues under the Equal Protection Clause. The court rejects the claim because nothing shows the test was selected or scored to disadvantage minority candidates.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
State prosecutors charge two men with violating a same-sex sodomy statute. The defendants argue the law was enacted to disadvantage gay men. The court applies rational-basis review after finding no evidence that the statute was maintained because of a purpose to harm men or women as a class.
A Black defendant sentenced to death presents statewide data showing Black defendants receive death sentences more often than white defendants for similar crimes. He offers no evidence that the prosecutor or jury in his case acted because of race. The court holds that the statistics do not prove discriminatory purpose in the individual sentencing decision.
A Muslim detainee alleges high-interest classification after September 11 but supplies no facts linking the Attorney General or FBI Director to any decision made because of religion or national origin. The court dismisses the claim because the complaint does not plausibly allege that the officials acted with discriminatory purpose.
A group of foreign nationals challenges a presidential proclamation restricting entry from several Muslim-majority countries. They point to campaign statements suggesting hostility toward Islam. The Court examines whether the proclamation was adopted because of a purpose to disfavor Muslims and concludes that the stated national-security rationale controls.
No. Courts may infer purpose from circumstantial evidence including the sequence of events, departures from normal procedures, legislative history, and the foreseeability of the disparate impact. Direct statements are helpful but not required.
Supporting sources
No. Under established equal protection doctrine, a facially neutral policy that produces a disproportionate effect on a protected class violates the Constitution only when the plaintiff also proves that the policy was adopted or maintained at least in part because of that effect.
Supporting sources
A defendant must show both that similarly situated persons of a different race or class were not prosecuted and that the prosecutor acted because of a discriminatory purpose. Statistical disparities alone do not establish the required purpose.
Supporting sources
The burden shifts to the government to show that the same decision would have been reached even without the impermissible purpose. If the government fails to make that showing, the action violates equal protection.
Supporting sources
…rational-basis review, because the Virginia statute was "designed to maintain White Supremacy." Id. , at 6, 11. A racially discriminatory purpose is always sufficient to subject a law to strict scrutiny, even a facially neutral law that makes no mention of race. See Washington v. Davis , 426 U. S. 229, 241-242 (1976). No purpose to…