Also known as: heightened-scrutiny · intermediate scrutiny
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A standard of judicial review lying between rational-basis review and strict scrutiny. The government must show that a classification is substantially related to an important governmental objective and must supply an exceedingly persuasive justification that is genuine rather than hypothesized.
Harriet Hamilton and her husband seek to purchase contraceptives from a local pharmacy. State law prohibits their sale to married couples. The couple sues, arguing the ban invades marital privacy. The court applies heightened scrutiny because the statute directly burdens the intimate marital relationship protected by the Constitution.
Hunter Hughes and his wife jointly own several rental properties. A state statute permits only the husband to mortgage or sell the properties without the wife's consent. Hunter attempts a sale and the recorder refuses without his wife's signature. The court subjects the gender classification to heightened scrutiny and finds it fails because administrative convenience alone does not supply an exceedingly persuasive justification.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Hyperion Systems operates a cable system and challenges a federal must-carry rule requiring carriage of local broadcast stations. The company argues the rule burdens its editorial discretion. The court applies intermediate scrutiny because the regulation is content-neutral and requires the government to demonstrate that it advances important interests unrelated to speech suppression without burdening substantially more speech than necessary.
Hilda Hernandez applies to a state-supported military college that admits only men. The college defends the exclusion as preserving its distinctive educational method. The court subjects the gender classification to heightened scrutiny and requires the state to prove an exceedingly persuasive justification that is substantially related to an important objective without relying on overbroad stereotypes.
Hector Hernandez, an eighteen-year-old male, is charged under a statute that criminalizes sexual intercourse only when the male is the older party. He argues the gender classification lacks sufficient justification. The court applies heightened scrutiny and upholds the statute because the classification is substantially related to the important interest of preventing teenage pregnancy given the physical burdens borne only by females.
Hope Howard, a seventeen-year-old, wishes to contribute to a political candidate but is barred by a federal statute limiting contributions by minors. She challenges the limit as an infringement on protected association. The court applies heightened scrutiny and asks whether the government has shown a sufficiently important interest and whether the limit is closely drawn to avoid unnecessary abridgment of associational rights.
Heightened scrutiny applies to quasi-suspect classifications such as gender. The government must demonstrate that the classification is substantially related to an important governmental objective and must supply an exceedingly persuasive justification.
Supporting sources
Heightened scrutiny requires the government to show a substantial relationship to an important interest. Strict scrutiny demands a narrowly tailored means to a compelling interest. Gender classifications receive the former while racial classifications receive the latter.
Supporting sources
The government must prove an exceedingly persuasive justification that is genuine and not hypothesized. Overbroad generalizations about the roles or capacities of men and women will not suffice.
Supporting sources
Yes. Content-neutral regulations such as must-carry rules are subject to intermediate scrutiny. The government must show that the regulation advances important interests unrelated to the suppression of speech and does not burden substantially more speech than necessary.
Supporting sources
…scrutiny under the doctrine of "substantive due process." Roe and Casey , of course, subjected the restriction of abortion to heightened scrutiny without even attempting to establish that the freedom to abort was rooted in this Nation's tradition. (2) Bowers , the Court says, has been subject to "substantial and continuing…