Facts of the Case
In 1980, Cleburne Living Center, Inc. submitted a permit application to operate a home for the mentally retarded. The city council of Cleburne voted to deny the special use permit, acting pursuant to a municipal zoning ordinance.
Questions
Did the denial of the permit violate the Equal Protection rights of Cleburne Living Center, Inc. and its potential residents?
Conclusions
-
In a unanimous judgment, the Court held that the denial of the special use permit to Cleburne Living Centers, Inc. was premised on an irrational prejudice against the mentally retarded, and hence unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. While the Court declined to grant the mentally retarded the status of a "quasi-suspect class," it nevertheless found that the "rational relation" test for legislative action provided sufficient protection against invidious discrimination.
Protecting Economic Liberty in the Federal Courts: Theory, Precedent, Practice
Federalist Society Review, Volume 22
The 14th Amendment meaningfully protects economic liberty. While this protection was originally housed in the...
Is Rational Basis the Appropriate Test to Apply in Reviewing Emergency COVID-19 Orders?
In a year in which “quarantine” and “lock-down” have become colloquial terms, the country has...
Why Nineteenth Century Bans on “Sectarian” Aid Are Facially Unconstitutional: New Evidence on Plain Meaning
Federalist Society Review, Volume 19
Note from the Editor: This article presents original research on the nineteenth century meaning of...
Lions Under the Bureaucracy: Defending Judicial Deference to the Administrative State
Federalist Society Review, Volume 18
A Review of: Law’s Abnegation: From Law’s Empire to the Administrative State, by Adrian Vermeule ...
History and Recent Development in Same-Sex Marriage Litigation
Engage Volume 15, Issue 1
Note from the Editor: The purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive national survey...
Same-Sex Marriage: A Variety of Perspectives on United States v. Windsor and Hollingsworth v. Perry
Engage Volume 14, Issue 1 February 2013
Decoding the Constitutional Challenges to Traditional Marriage By John C. Eastman* On December 7, 2012,...