noting limited application of general standard of intermediate scrutiny—subject legislative discrimination must be “substantially related to an important government interest”—applicable to Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claims not subject to strict scrutiny and variants of that standard applied to “limitations on the right to vote”—internal punctuation and citations omitted, emphasis added
How later courts described this case
- noting limited application of general standard of intermediate scrutiny—subject legislative discrimination must be “substantially related to an important government interest”—applicable to Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claims not subject to strict scrutiny and variants of that standard applied to “limitations on the right to vote”—internal punctuation and citations omitted, emphasis added
- requiring that subject legislative discrimination be “reasonable” and “more important than” the non-fundamental Montana constitutional right at issue
- holding that Montana's constitution does not create a right to welfare
- denying a right status as a “fundamental right” due to its omission from Article II
Written by the judges who cited it.
Later courts went against this
Superseded on other grounds by Zempel v. Uninsured Employers' Fund, 282 Mont. 424 (1997)
219 Mont. 426, 712 P.2d 1309 (1986), superseded on other grounds as recognized in Zempel v. Uninsured Employers’ Fund, 282 Mont. 424, 938 P.2d 658 (1997), and
The opinion
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE TURNAGE,
specially concurring:
I concur in the specially concurring opinion of Mr. Justice Gulbrandson.