If this is proved, the state must then demonstrate that the legislation is narrowly tailored to achieve the intended result. To withstand strict scrutiny, the government must show that its policy is necessary to achieve a compelling state interest. The government has the burden of proving that its challenged policy is constitutional. Once a court determines that strict scrutiny must be applied, it is presumed that the law or policy is unconstitutional. In addition, laws and policies that discriminate on the basis of race are categorized as suspect classifications that are presumptively impermissible and subject to strict scrutiny. The Supreme Court has identified the right to vote, the right to travel, and the right to privacy as fundamental rights worthy of protection by strict scrutiny. Strict scrutiny is the most rigorous form of judicial review. 2d 397 (1976), 'classifications by gender must serve important governmental objectives and must be substantially related to the achievement of those objectives.' The heightened scrutiny test is used in cases involving matters of discrimination based on sex. When employed, the Rational Basis Test usually results in a court upholding the constitutionality of the law, because the test gives great deference to the legislative branch. It is used in cases where a plaintiff alleges that the legislature has made an Arbitrary or irrational decision. The rational basis test is the lowest form of judicial scrutiny. The strict scrutiny standard is one of three employed by the courts in reviewing laws and government policies. The Court has also identified certain rights that it deems to be fundamental rights, even though they are not enumerated in the Constitution. Supreme Court has applied this standard to laws or policies that impinge on a right explicitly protected by the U.S. Federal courts use strict scrutiny to determine whether certain types of government policies are constitutional. The strict scrutiny standard of judicial review is based on the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. A standard of Judicial Review for a challenged policy in which the court presumes the policy to be invalid unless the government can demonstrate a compelling interest to justify the policy.

Strict scrutiny test