I Am Codell Craddock For The Respondent Essay - 1089 Words

I am Codell Craddock for the Respondent. My colleague, Fiona O’Brien has effectively demonstrated why the Hybrid Rights is merely dicta on the part of Justice Scalia and I will immediately follow by defining rational basis review. Rational Basis is the standard of review used by courts when reviewing matters pertaining to the fifth and fourteenth amendment. If a law proves to be rationally related to a legitimate government interest, then it passes rational basis review. In addition, it is not the duty of the court to review the intent of the law, but merely to decide if their is a relationship between the law and a government interest.† This rationale was upheld in Swanson Swanson v. Gurthrie Independent school district when the supreme court ruled that the school district’s rule to require all students to attend public school full-time is a general law that tailors to a governmental interest. In our case, the candy ban was instituted to combat childhood obesity which is a governmental interest. Because as we saw in Barsky vs Board of Regents, the public health of a community is a vital part of a state’s police power. It is clear from this, that although the Candy Ban incidentally affects the practice of a religion, there is a clear relationship between the candy ban and public health, a legitimate government interest. Therefore, it passes the rational basis test. Moving on let’s discuss, for a moment, that the hybrid rights claim is viable. A claim that may be used when a