Abstract
This article considers the fundamental axiom that we should treat like cases alike. While many theories justify this assertion, this article considers when, and more importantly why, a society would be justified in not treating like cases alike. It notes that under current Supreme Court doctrine, alleged violations of this equal protection principle are reviewed under rational basis test with minimal scrutiny applied to lower court decisions. Yet, some cases, when a fundamental right is allegedly denied, invoke the strict scrutiny standard. In those cases, government action is only permitted if there is a compelling state interest. This article lays the groundwork for discussing what could be a compelling state interest.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
