Legal Definitions - equal protection

Equal protection is a core legal principle that ensures governmental bodies, whether federal or state, must treat individuals in similar circumstances in the same manner under the law. It means that the government cannot create laws or policies that unfairly discriminate against people based on arbitrary or irrelevant differences. While governments are allowed to make distinctions between groups of people, such distinctions must be based on a legitimate governmental objective and cannot be discriminatory without a strong, constitutionally permissible justification.

This principle is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution: the Fifth Amendment applies it to the federal government, and the Fourteenth Amendment'sEqual Protection Clause applies it to state and local governments. It is a cornerstone of civil rights, designed to prevent governments from singling out individuals or groups for unfavorable treatment without a valid, non-discriminatory reason. When a government action is challenged under equal protection, courts examine the government's reasons for the distinction using different levels of scrutiny, depending on the nature of the discrimination.

• Example 1: A city ordinance targeting a specific group.

  Imagine a city council passes a new ordinance that prohibits street vendors from operating their businesses only on blocks where a majority of residents belong to a particular ethnic minority group, while allowing street vending to continue freely in all other neighborhoods.

  How it illustrates equal protection: This ordinance would likely violate the principle of equal protection. It treats individuals (street vendors) differently based on the ethnic composition of the neighborhood they wish to operate in, which is an irrelevant and potentially discriminatory distinction. Unless the city can demonstrate a compelling, non-discriminatory reason directly related to public safety or welfare that applies uniquely to those specific blocks and not others, it would be seen as unfairly targeting a particular group.

• Example 2: State licensing requirements.

  Consider a state law that requires all applicants for a professional license (e.g., for doctors or engineers) who received their education outside of that state to complete an additional, costly, and time-consuming residency program, even if their out-of-state education and experience are demonstrably equivalent to those of in-state graduates. In-state graduates are exempt from this extra requirement.

  How it illustrates equal protection: This law could be challenged under equal protection because it treats individuals with similar qualifications (equivalent education and experience) differently based solely on where they received their schooling. While a state might have a legitimate interest in ensuring professional competence, requiring an additional burden for out-of-state graduates without a clear, non-discriminatory justification for the distinction could be seen as creating an unfair barrier to entry for professionals from other states.

• Example 3: Differentiated public services based on residency.

  A state university charges higher tuition fees for students who are not residents of that state compared to students who are state residents.

  How it illustrates equal protection: This is generally considered a permissible differentiation under equal protection. The state has a legitimate governmental interest in subsidizing the education of its own residents, who contribute to the state's tax base. While it treats students differently based on residency, this distinction is relevant to the state's funding and educational objectives and is not considered an arbitrary or invidious classification. Therefore, it typically does not violate the equal protection clause.