The following excerpt is from Southern Pacific Transp. Co. v. City of Los Angeles, 922 F.2d 498 (9th Cir. 1990):
Appellants' facial equal protection claim also must fail. Because Southern Pacific does not allege that the regulation discriminates against a suspect class, the standard of review is highly deferential. "[A]ppellees need only show that the classification scheme is 'rationally related to a legitimate state interest.' " Pennell, 485 U.S. at 14, 108 S.Ct. at 859 (quoting New Orleans v. Duke, 427 U.S. 297, 303, 96 S.Ct. 2513, 2517, 49 L.Ed.2d 511 (1976)). The City has set forth plausible reasons for its zoning policy and for its decision to focus on narrow strips of land such as appellants'. Presumably, the zoning might have been more equitable, perhaps even
Page 508
D. Disposition of Unripe Claims
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.