If a law is content-based, what standard is typically applied?

If a law is content-based, what standard is typically applied?

• A. Strict Scrutiny
• B. Rational Basis Review
• C. Intermediate Scrutiny
• D. No Scrutiny

Answer: (A)

When a law singles out speech based on its content, the courts treat it with strict scrutiny—the most demanding level of review. This means the government must show a compelling interest behind the restriction and that the law is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest, using the least restrictive means possible. In other words, the restriction must be essential to a significant goal and cannot be achieved in a less burdensome way. This is different from other standards because content-based limits on speech are viewed as more intrusive to First Amendment rights, so they face the toughest check. Rational basis review is far too lenient for content-based restrictions, and intermediate scrutiny generally applies to other types of cases (often involving certain categories like sex or gender or some time/place/manner restrictions that aren’t tied to the message). No scrutiny would apply only in contexts that don’t seriously burden fundamental rights. So, for a law that regulates speech based on what the speech says, strict scrutiny is the typical standard.

When a law singles out speech based on its content, the courts treat it with strict scrutiny—the most demanding level of review. This means the government must show a compelling interest behind the restriction and that the law is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest, using the least restrictive means possible. In other words, the restriction must be essential to a significant goal and cannot be achieved in a less burdensome way.

This is different from other standards because content-based limits on speech are viewed as more intrusive to First Amendment rights, so they face the toughest check. Rational basis review is far too lenient for content-based restrictions, and intermediate scrutiny generally applies to other types of cases (often involving certain categories like sex or gender or some time/place/manner restrictions that aren’t tied to the message). No scrutiny would apply only in contexts that don’t seriously burden fundamental rights.

So, for a law that regulates speech based on what the speech says, strict scrutiny is the typical standard.