MBE Rules · Constitutional Law
Alienage Classifications
Graham v. Richardson / Sugarman
The rule
State discrimination against lawful aliens triggers strict scrutiny, except the political-function exception (voting, juries, police, teachers) gets rational basis; federal alienage rules get deference.
In plain English
When a state discriminates against lawful aliens, the courts apply strict scrutiny to evaluate whether the discrimination is justified. However, if the discrimination relates to political functions, such as voting or serving on a jury, it only needs to meet a rational basis standard. Federal laws regarding alienage are given more deference than state laws.
Worked example
A state law prohibits lawful aliens from becoming police officers. Under strict scrutiny, the state must show a compelling interest for this discrimination. Since being a police officer is a political function, the law only needs to satisfy the rational basis test, which it does by arguing that only citizens should enforce the law. The court upholds the law.
Memory hook
Strict scrutiny for aliens, but rational basis for political roles!
The trap
Exams may present scenarios where students mistakenly apply strict scrutiny to political-function cases instead of recognizing the rational basis standard. Students should be careful to identify the context of the discrimination.
How examiners test it
Questions often involve a state law that discriminates against aliens in various roles, requiring students to determine the appropriate level of scrutiny and the rationale behind the law.
Drill this rule until it can't fail you.
Vrenberg generates unlimited questions on this exact rule, tracks your mastery of it, and brings it back until it sticks.