Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

mid-level scrutiny

Read a random definition: embezzler

A quick definition of mid-level scrutiny:

Mid-level scrutiny is a term used in law to describe a level of examination that is not as strict as strict scrutiny, but not as lenient as rational basis scrutiny. It is also known as intermediate scrutiny. This level of scrutiny is used to evaluate laws that may affect certain groups of people differently, such as gender or sexual orientation. The court will examine the law to determine if it is substantially related to an important government interest.

A more thorough explanation:

Definition: Mid-level scrutiny is a legal standard used by courts to evaluate laws that may discriminate against certain groups of people. It is also known as intermediate scrutiny. This standard requires the government to show that the law serves an important government interest and is substantially related to achieving that interest.

Example: One example of a law that would be subject to mid-level scrutiny is a state law that requires all firefighters to be at least 6 feet tall. This law may discriminate against women and people of certain ethnicities who are typically shorter in stature. To pass mid-level scrutiny, the government would need to show that the height requirement is necessary for the job and that there are no alternative ways to ensure public safety.

Another example of a law that would be subject to mid-level scrutiny is a state law that prohibits same-sex couples from adopting children. This law may discriminate against LGBTQ+ individuals. To pass mid-level scrutiny, the government would need to show that the law serves an important government interest, such as promoting the best interests of children, and that the prohibition on same-sex adoption is substantially related to achieving that interest.

These examples illustrate how mid-level scrutiny requires the government to justify laws that may discriminate against certain groups of people. The government must show that the law serves an important government interest and that there are no less discriminatory alternatives to achieving that interest.

middle thread | midnight deadline

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
16:42
@Law-Shark: also kind of rude for you to be speaking to me like that, the event started at 9am and I had to wakeup at 4 to drive in. i was tired and couldn't even check in until 4pm if I wanted to so I just drove back. it's unprofessional to offer it the night before and not the day after. they also didn't feed us actual food and we were there until 2pm.
Law-Shark
16:43
The fact you didn't think a reservation in your name is something you need to be responsible for and cancel if you weren't going to show up to by sending a simple email is absolutely iresponsible.
16:43
I didn't make a reservation tho?
16:44
Yeah, I would have definitely gone to the hotel if I knew they booked a room for me. At the very least, it would be proper to show up personally and explain your extraneous circumstances
Law-Shark
16:44
Nah but it's in your name. I went to an ASD. I asked the school for an extra night and they gave it to me. You just need to plan things better.
Law-Shark
16:45
This is like peak disconenct between the male and female brain.
16:45
i think that's where i was confused then
Law-Shark
16:45
disconnect*
Law-Shark
16:45
You live and you learn
16:45
because i did let one of the staff know i'd be leaving early and thought that would be enough
16:46
but i was confused why i got an e-mail with a room cuz I didn't ask for it at all
Law-Shark
16:46
Well, you know now what to do.
16:47
well on their end they prob shouldn't just be buying hotel rooms for ppl who don't request it and then getting mad I didn't go
16:48
goof
16:48
Did you get any materials for admitted students day explaining that they would be booking hotel rooms?
16:49
there was an opt in on the form but I didn't select yes
16:49
Hmm, that's weird
16:50
i think it's unprofessional of them to call you like what if you had an emergency and had to leave? why is it their business why you didn't stay? not like they're lacking money and $100.00 hotel room is gona make them bankrupt
16:50
i figured it was an error and I was on the road so I didn't read into it. plus it would make more sense for it to be the night before cuz it started at 9am? so I was like uhhh and paid it no mind
16:51
@bigfatsloth: that's what i'm saying, they were gonna pay no matter what
16:54
"This is like peak disconenct between the male and female brain." like bffr
16:55
It was probably an administrative error then. I can't imagine why they would book hotel rooms for people that didn't select yes. I would maybe follow up with them and apologize for the misunderstanding to avoid any awkwardness
Denny
16:56
who watch that arsenal game
16:56
I'm a Chelsea fan unfortunately
damn why are yall fighting i the lsd.law gc
Denny
17:14
@ET025: but ur not watching champions league?
Denny
17:15
declan rice did a madness
17:20
@Denny: Not today. Doing more LSAT studying this afternoon, but I saw that. I think Chelsea missed out on him. (this is probably more suited for OT)
Does anyone have experience getting their aid package reconsidered at WashU? How long does it take to hear back after sending the form?
MrThickRopes
21:01
fo pm gon be good to us tmrw
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.