classification
Definitions from Case Law · United States Supreme Court
Definitions from Case Law
From 216 U.S. 400 - Southern Railway Co. v. Greene · 1910Most cited · 437 citing opinions
permissible under equal protection
While reasonable classification is permitted, without doing violence to the equal protection of the laws, such classification must be based upon some real and substantial distinction, bearing a reasonable and just relation to the things in respect to which such classification is imposed; and classification cannot be arbitrarily made without any substantial basis. Arbitrary selection, it has been said, cannot be justified by calling it classification.
How the Supreme Court has restated “classification”
Each Supreme Court definition of “classification,” sized by how often later courts cited it. “Change” is measured by wording overlap with earlier definitions — a rough signal, not a semantic judgment.
How often courts cite the cases defining “classification”
Court decisions citing the 7 opinions that defined “classification” — 1,353 in all, by decade. Counts are citations to the defining cases as a whole, not verified uses of the term. The dip in the most recent years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the latest years.
All 7 definitions, chronological · 1907–1941
- ORIGINAL
We have declared many times, and illustrated the declaration, that classification must have relation to the purpose of the legislature. But logical appropriateness of the inclusion or exclusion of objects or persons is not required. A classification may not be merely arbitrary, but necessarily there must be great freedom of discretion, even though it result in 'ill-advised, unequal, and oppressive legislation.
legislative discretion
A very wide discretion must be conceded to the legislative power of the state in the classification of trades, callings, businesses, or occupations which may be subjected to special forms of regulation or taxation through an excise or license tax. If the selection or classification is neither capricious nor arbitrary, and rests upon some reasonable consideration of difference or policy, there is no denial of the equal protection of the law.
occupation tax
That danger is the test may be conceded, but there may be degrees of it, and a difference in degree may justify classification.
14th Amendment equal protection
A classification is not invalid because of simple inequality. ... 'The very idea of classification is that of inequality, so that it goes without saying that the fact of inequality in no manner determines the matter of constitutionality.' ... whether a combination of wage earners or purchasers of commodities called for repression by law under the conditions in the state was for the legislature of the state to determine.
inequality not invalidating
Classification is not different in law than in other departments of knowledge. It is the grouping of things in speculation or practice because they agree with one another in certain particulars and differ from other things in those particulars. Upon what differences or resemblances it may be exercised depends necessarily upon the object in view, may be narrow or wide according to that object.
The equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not prevent a state from classifying businesses for taxation or impose any iron rule of equality. Some occupations may be taxed though others are not. Some may be taxed at one rate, others at a different rate. Classification is not discrimination. It is enough that those in the same class are treated with equality.
equal protection