Also known as: strict scrutiny · strict scrutiny test · strict scrutiny standard
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
The most demanding standard of judicial review, requiring a law to be narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest. It applies when government action burdens a fundamental right or classifies persons on the basis of race or another suspect category. Failure to satisfy either prong renders the measure invalid.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Sylvia Santos, a Santeria practitioner, seeks to perform animal sacrifices central to her faith. A city ordinance bans the precise method she uses while permitting other forms of animal killing. The court subjects the ordinance to strict scrutiny because it targets religious conduct and invalidates it after finding no compelling interest narrowly served by the ban.
Sterling Dynamics, a minority-owned firm, challenges a municipal program reserving a percentage of public contracts for businesses owned by members of designated racial groups. The city offers only generalized evidence of past societal discrimination rather than specific findings tied to its own contracting history. The court applies strict scrutiny and strikes down the set-aside for lack of narrow tailoring to identified discrimination.
Sasha Stone operates a religiously affiliated foster agency that declines to certify same-sex couples on doctrinal grounds. A city rule bars agencies from rejecting applicants on that basis yet permits officials to grant individualized exemptions in other contexts. The court applies strict scrutiny because the policy is not generally applicable and invalidates enforcement against the agency.
Simon Stern seeks to register a trademark containing a term some find offensive. A federal statute prohibits registration of marks deemed disparaging. The court treats the bar as a viewpoint-based restriction on private speech and subjects it to strict scrutiny, holding the prohibition unconstitutional.
Stella Shapiro burns a cross on private property to express racial animus. A city ordinance criminalizes cross burning only when done to intimidate on the basis of race. The court subjects the content-based distinction within the category of fighting words to strict scrutiny and invalidates the ordinance.
Sarah Sullivan, a married woman, seeks contraceptive advice from her physician. A state statute criminalizes the use of contraceptives by married persons. The court applies strict scrutiny to the law because it burdens a fundamental liberty interest in marital privacy and invalidates the prohibition.
A state policy that expressly excludes applicants whose founding teams are predominantly from a specified ethnic group is a facial ethnic classification. Such classifications are inherently suspect and subject to strict scrutiny. The state must demonstrate that the classification is narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling governmental interest.
Supporting sources
A statute that restricts the sale of violent video games to minors is a content-based regulation of protected speech and is subject to strict scrutiny. The law is unconstitutional if it is underinclusive and overinclusive relative to the asserted interest and attempts to create a new category of unprotected speech.
…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…
…agree with the result reached by the Court but would rest the decision on the ground that the statute fails to satisfy the strict scrutiny test applicable to infringements of fundamental rights. The statute as applied to married couples is an arbitrary and unreasonable interference with the right of marital privacy. Dissenting…
…Process Clause. IV For very similar reasons, the equal protection claim must fail, since it is not to be judged by the strict scrutiny standard
…which was handed down just a month ago. In Burson , seven of the eight participating Members of the Court agreed that the strict scrutiny standard
…urge us to hold that classifications based on illegitimacy are "suspect," so that any justifications must survive "strict scrutiny." We considered and rejected a similar argument last Term in Mathews v. Lucas , 427 U. S. 495 (1976). As we recognized in Lucas , illegitimacy is analogous in many respects to the…
Supporting sources
State durational residency requirements for welfare eligibility violate the constitutional right to travel and the Equal Protection Clause. States may not use residency requirements to deter the migration of indigent persons. A state purpose of protecting its treasury by discouraging entry of those who might need assistance is not a constitutionally permissible governmental objective.
Supporting sources
Content discrimination within a particular category of even otherwise unprotected expression merits First Amendment protection and is subject to strict scrutiny review. An ordinance that discriminates between classes of fighting words based on speech content fails strict scrutiny when content-neutral alternatives are available.
Supporting sources