Five years after this doctrine was first introduced, it was applied by the Supreme Court in the case of Michael M. v. Superior Court, which upheld a statutory rape law in Sonoma County, California.
Five years after this doctrine was first introduced, it was applied by the Supreme Court in the case of Michael M. v. Superior Court, which upheld a statutory rape law in Sonoma County, California. Also applied in J.E.B. v. Alabama, this doctrine was extended to apply to illegitimate persons in the 1988 case Clark v. Jeter, which asked whether a Pennsylvania paternity law could treat illegitimate children different than legitimate ones. The case that first introduced this doctrine involved the sale of beer with 3.2 percent alcohol in Oklahoma - that case is Craig v. Boren. This doctrine requires courts to determine whether a law is "substantially related to the achievement of an important governmental objective," and it's most frequently applied to gender-based classifications. FTP, name this type of judicial review which is more demanding that "rational basis" but less demanding that "strict scrutiny." 
Five years after this doctrine was first introduced, it was applied by the Supreme Court in the case of Michael M. v. Superior Court, which upheld a statutory rape law in Sonoma County, California.
"intermediate scrutiny" (accept "gender-based classificiations" or anything indicating "equal protection for women" or "laws that treat women differently" - but only up until the phrase "gender-based") 