Also known as: significant governmental interests · significant government interest · important governmental interest
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A governmental objective substantial enough to justify a gender classification or a contribution limit under intermediate scrutiny. The objective must be unrelated to the suppression of ideas and the means chosen must be substantially related or closely drawn to it.
A state statute bars nonmarital children from inheriting from intestate fathers. Samantha Stone, a nonmarital child, challenges the bar. The state defends the classification as serving a significant governmental interest in orderly estate administration. The court strikes the statute because the classification is not substantially related to that interest.
Congress caps individual donations to political committees at $5,000 per election cycle. Simon Stern, a frequent donor, sues claiming the cap burdens his speech. The government justifies the cap as advancing a sufficiently important governmental interest in preventing corruption and its appearance. The court sustains the limit because it is closely drawn and does not foreclose other forms of political participation.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A city requires advance permits for any unattended religious display on the capitol grounds. Serena Soto seeks to erect a menorah without a permit and is denied. City officials cite a significant governmental interest in preserving the appearance and safety of the public square. The court finds the permit rule valid because it is content-neutral, narrowly tailored, and leaves open other expressive options.
A state criminalizes statutory rape for males but not females. Sasha Stone, a male defendant, claims sex discrimination. The state defends the classification as serving a significant governmental interest in preventing teenage pregnancy. The court upholds the statute because the gender classification is substantially related to that interest.
Federal law prohibits corporations from using general treasury funds for independent electioneering communications. Sean Steele, a corporate officer, seeks to fund a documentary critical of a candidate. The government asserts a sufficiently important governmental interest in preventing distortion of the electoral process by corporate wealth. The court rejects the ban because the interest does not justify the outright suppression of corporate speech.
Congress bars national political parties from accepting unregulated soft-money donations. Seth Shapiro, a party treasurer, challenges the prohibition. The government defends it as advancing a sufficiently important governmental interest in reducing actual and apparent corruption. The court upholds the restriction because it is closely drawn to the interest and permits other lawful fundraising methods.
The interest must be substantial and unrelated to the suppression of ideas. Preventing litter, maintaining public order, and avoiding corruption have all been recognized as significant when supported by the record.
Significant governmental interest is the lower threshold used for content-neutral time, place, and manner rules. Compelling interest is required for content-based restrictions and strict scrutiny.
Yes, but a total ban on handbill distribution is not narrowly tailored to that interest. Less restrictive measures such as requiring cleanup must be considered first.
Yes. The justification must be content-neutral. An interest tied to the message itself triggers strict scrutiny instead of the intermediate test.
…required by clear and compelling governmental interests “of the highest order,” Yoder, supra , at 215. “Only an especially important governmental interest pursued by narrowly tailored means can justify exacting a sacrifice of First Amendment freedoms as the price for an equal share of the rights, benefits, and privileges enjoyed by other…