The best magazine
- 1). Demonstrate that the right infringed by the law is a statutory right. Present to the court the provision of the law that grants the right. Describe how the plaintiff's actions or activities that were affected by the law involved the statutory right.
Note, in deference to the legislature, that the court presumes the law the government enacted is valid. - 2). Prove the violation of due process by showing that the government's interest in the law is not legitimate. Regulatory interests listed with the Article I, Section 8 powers are legitimate interests. The interest can not violate any part of the Constitution or a ruling statute. Begin the proof by showing the legislature's intended interest is not legitimate, only presumed legitimate.
- 3). If the intended interest is not legitimate, the plaintiff also must prove that the law does not achieve a legitimate interest. The deference given to the legislature is so high, so a law that in fact achieves a legitimate interest (though the legislature did not intend to achieve the interest), does not violate due process.
- 4). Or, if the interest is legitimate, prove the means the government chose to achieve the legitimate interest is not rationally related to the ends. The rule needs to address the problem or give the citizens the benefit. When the legislature intends a rule to regulate one thing, but in fact regulates another, the rule is not an acceptable means. A rule that does not aim at an end is not rationally related.
- 5). If you show that the means are not rationally related, then prove the government has an alternative for achieving the end. The plaintiff needs to show that the state had an alternative that does address the problem, or give the benefit, and does not violate due process.
Source: ...