1:The rational basis test of the Equal Protection Clause would legally permit which of the following? Select all that apply(2 points)
A:Not allowing a 10 year old to drive.***
B:Not allowing a woman to be president.
C:Not allowing a male to supervise a female locker room.***
D:Not allowing a female to coach a men's basketball team.
2:The Fourteenth Amendment was ratified after the Civil War, Yet the first Supreme Court equal protection ruling relates to gender was not made until the 1970's in Reed v Reed.
Which of the following is a reason for the disparity between the promises and protections of the Constitution and the reality of women's experiences?
A:The Supreme Court lacked enforcement power.
B:Societal norm persisted despite legal protections.***
C:The Nineteenth Amendment needed to be ratified first.
D:Equal protection only applied to racial discrimination.
Are these correct?
For Connexus the answers are:
1. B.
2. A. C.
3. B.
I made a 100
:) Have a nice day
1. Which of the following is a reason for the disparity between their promises and protections of the Constitution and their reality of women's experiences?
B- Societal norms persisted despite legal protections
2) The rational basis test of the equal protection calls would legally permit which of the following? Select all apply.
A- not allowing a 10-year-old to drive
C- not allowing a male to supervise a female locker room
3) what does the rational basis test require in order to justify government discrimination among groups of people?
B- proper government purpose
đź’Ż
Ha ha ha Little man is right
Well, I must say, you've certainly chosen some interesting questions! Let's see if I can bring some humor to these legal inquiries.
1: The rational basis test of the Equal Protection Clause would legally permit:
A: Not allowing a 10 year old to drive. - Well, that's probably a good thing. Can you imagine a 10-year-old drag racing down the highway? Yikes!
C: Not allowing a male to supervise a female locker room. - I can only imagine the chaos that could ensue if males were supervising female locker rooms. Let's keep that situation separate, shall we?
2: The disparity between the promises and protections of the Constitution and the reality of women's experiences could be due to:
B: Societal norm persisted despite legal protections. - Ah, yes, the pesky societal norms that tend to stick around even when the law says otherwise. Society can be a bit stubborn, can't it?
So, while I can't provide the definitive legal answers you're seeking, I hope I brought a little humor to your quest for knowledge!
For question 1, to determine which options would be legally permitted under the rational basis test of the Equal Protection Clause, we need to understand what the rational basis test entails.
The rational basis test is a standard used by courts to assess the constitutionality of a law or government action under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Under this test, a law or action is deemed constitutional if it can be reasonably related to a legitimate government interest.
Applying this understanding, we can evaluate the options provided:
A: Not allowing a 10-year-old to drive - This is likely to be legally permitted since there is a legitimate government interest in ensuring public safety by restricting driving privileges to individuals who meet the minimum age requirements. Therefore, this option is correct.
B: Not allowing a woman to be president - This would likely be considered unconstitutional as it would violate the principle of equal protection. Gender-based restrictions on holding public office are generally not considered legitimate government interests. Therefore, this option is incorrect.
C: Not allowing a male to supervise a female locker room - This could be legally permitted if there is a legitimate government interest, such as privacy concerns or the protection of vulnerable individuals. However, without further context, it is difficult to definitively determine the legality of this restriction. Therefore, this option is partially correct.
D: Not allowing a female to coach a men's basketball team - This would likely be considered unconstitutional as it would impede the principle of equal protection. Gender-based restrictions on employment are generally subject to higher scrutiny and must be narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest. Without further context, it is difficult to determine the legality of this restriction. Therefore, this option is incorrect.
Based on this analysis, options A and C would be legally permitted under the rational basis test. Therefore, your selections (A and C) are correct for question 1.
For question 2, the reason for the disparity between the promises and protections of the Constitution and the reality of women's experiences is societal norms persisting despite legal protections. Option B is correct because even though the Constitution guarantees equal protection, societal attitudes and biases towards women have persisted over time, impeding the full realization of women's rights. The other options (A, C, and D) are not valid reasons for the disparity described in the question.
I agree with both of your answers.
if youre in honors its
1:b
2:b,d
3:a