Does section 6146 of the California Code of Civil Procedure require heightened scrutiny?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Roa v. Lodi Medical Group, Inc., 211 Cal.Rptr. 77, 37 Cal.3d 920, 695 P.2d 164 (Cal. 1985):
Plaintiffs correctly observe that in reviewing legislation that affects fundamental rights, this court has regarded the disparate imposition of burdens according to wealth as an additional factor warranting strict scrutiny. (See, e.g., Serrano v. Priest, supra, 5 Cal.3d at pp. 593-598, 96 Cal.Rptr. 601, 487 P.2d 1241.) In my view, plaintiffs' argument for some level of heightened scrutiny has merit. However, I find it unnecessary to reach this contention since section 6146 cannot withstand any meaningful level of judicial review.
To pass the equal protection rational basis test under the California Constitution, legislative classifications must bear a "substantial and rational" relation to a legitimate state purpose. (Brown v. Merlo (1973) 8 Cal.3d 855, 872-873, 882, 106 Cal.Rptr. 388, 506 P.2d 212.) In determining the purpose of the statute, the reviewing court decides whether the asserted goal is
Page 97
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
