Legal Definitions - rational basis

rational basis

The term rational basis refers to a standard that courts use to determine whether a law or government action is constitutional. It is the lowest level of scrutiny applied by courts when reviewing laws, meaning it is relatively easy for the government to satisfy this test.

For a law to pass the rational basis test, two conditions must be met:

• The government must have a legitimate government interest (a valid, permissible goal that the government is allowed to pursue).
• There must be a reasonable connection between the law and that legitimate government interest (the law must be a sensible way to achieve the stated goal, even if it's not the best or most effective way).

This test is typically applied to laws that do not involve fundamental rights (like freedom of speech or religion) or "suspect classifications" (like race or national origin). Instead, it often applies to economic regulations, social welfare laws, and other general government policies.

Here are some examples:

• Example 1: City Ordinance for Food Trucks

  Imagine a city passes an ordinance requiring all food trucks operating within its limits to obtain a special permit and undergo annual health inspections, even if they are already licensed by the county. A food truck owner challenges this law, arguing it creates an unnecessary burden.

  A court applying the rational basis test would likely uphold this ordinance. The city's legitimate government interest is to protect public health and safety by ensuring that food sold within its jurisdiction meets specific sanitary standards. The requirement for a city-specific permit and inspection has a reasonable connection to achieving these goals, as it allows the city to directly monitor and enforce local health regulations. Even if county inspections exist, the city's additional oversight is considered a rational approach to its public health responsibilities.

• Example 2: State Law on Professional Licensing

  Consider a state law that requires individuals to complete a specific number of continuing education hours each year to maintain their professional license as a real estate agent. A long-time agent challenges this law, arguing that their extensive experience makes such requirements unnecessary for them.

  A court would likely apply the rational basis test here. The state could argue that its legitimate government interest includes protecting consumers, ensuring professionals remain knowledgeable about current laws and practices, and maintaining high standards within the profession. The requirement for continuing education has a reasonable connection to these objectives, as it is a way to ensure that all licensed agents, regardless of experience, stay updated and competent. The court would not question whether this is the most efficient way to achieve professional competence, only whether there is a rational link between the law and a permissible government goal.