What is the test for "shocking the conscience" in a civil action?

governmental action need only have a rational basis to be upheld against a substantive due process attack. United States v. Alexander, 48 F.3d 1477, 1491 (9th Cir. 1995).⁹ To the extent that plaintiff contends he was targeted and/or treated unfairly, he also cannot state a claim. Even if County officials unfairly or illegally imposed civil penalties and unwarranted costs for violation of the ordinance, that conduct falls far short of the "shocks the conscience" standard. See County of Sacramento v. Lewis, 523 U.S. 833 (1998) (causing death of motorcyclist by pursuing high-risk chase fails to "shock the conscience" as required for substantive due process violation).

2. Claim Three: Unreasonable Seizure