Substantive Due Process

This page includes a writing template for analyzing this topic and usage notes to guide its application. In general, the template is designed to serve as a starting point for your analysis. It should be adapted to fit the specific facts of your case and your professor’s preferences.

Writing Template

Issue

I: The issue is whether the state action has violated the individual’s right to substantive due process.

Analysis

R: Substantive due process, derived from the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, protects individuals from government actions that infringe upon fundamental rights. If the state action implicates a fundamental right, it is subject to strict scrutiny. Conversely, if the state action does not implicate a fundamental right, it is reviewed under the rational basis standard.

1. Does the state action implicate a fundamental right of the individual?

R: Fundamental rights include the right to marry, the right to procreate, the right to custody of one’s children, the right to domestic travel, the right to vote, the right to privacy, the right to refuse unwanted medical treatment, and the right to bear arms.

A: Here, [apply rule to facts].

C: Therefore, the state action [implicates/does not implicate] a fundamental right.

2a. Strict Scrutiny

R: If the law implicates a fundamental right, the action is unconstitutional unless it is (1) narrowly tailored to achieve a (2) compelling government interest. A government action is (1) narrowly tailored if it cannot achieve the government’s interest by less restrictive or less discriminatory means. A (2) compelling government interest is one that is necessary to protect critical public policies or goals, such as national security, public health, or fundamental rights. (Because strict scrutiny is intentionally stringent, few government actions satisfy this standard.)

A: Here, [apply rules to facts].

C: Therefore, the state action [satisfies/does not satisfy] strict scrutiny.

2b. Rational Basis Review

R: If a law does not implicate a fundamental right, it is presumed constitutional, and the burden of proof shifts to the challenger to demonstrate that it fails the rational basis test. Under this standard, the law is constitutional if it (1) advances a legitimate government interest and (2) is rationally related to achieving that interest. Legitimate government interests include public safety, public health, economic regulation, and general welfare.

A: Here, [apply rules to facts].

C: Therefore, the state action [satisfies/does not satisfy] rational basis review.

Conclusion

C: Therefore, the state action [has/has not] violated the individual’s right to substantive due process.

Usage Notes

JurisJotter templates synthesize legal principles into a practical format that supports the development of well-structured, point-rich analyses in a timed exam.

The template features (1) headers identifying the overall issue, analysis, and conclusion. If the analysis begins with an umbrella rule that identifies elements, factors, or steps of the analysis, it will be followed by subheaders that signpost the analysis of each component.

The template also features (2) IRAC labels at the beginning of each paragraph. These headers and labels are included for educational purposes, offering guidance on structuring your analysis. Your usage of the headers is optional but can be helpful to readers. We advise against including the IRAC labels in submitted work.

The templates serve as a general guide for writing and should be adapted to align with (1) your specific factual circumstances and (2) your professor’s preferences, particularly if your professor provides explicit formulations of rules or analyses. For example, you may add or subtract an element or modify its language. Regardless of whether your professor provides explicit formulations, (3) this template will assist you in crafting point-rich analyses.

Please note that these templates are writing aids and not finished products. They are efficiently designed for exam essays to demonstrate conceptual understanding; thus, they are not comprehensive outlines with historical context or dicta.

Questions or comments? Reach out at [email protected].