Opinion ID: 2638912
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Intermediate Scrutiny in New Mexico

Text: {30} The previous section described when intermediate scrutiny should be applied to legislation challenged under equal protection. We now discuss how intermediate scrutiny analyzes challenged legislation in New Mexico. Challenged legislation will be upheld if the classification is substantially related to an important government interest. See, e.g., Marrujo v. N.M. State Highway Transp. Dep't, 118 N.M. 753, 757, 887 P.2d 747, 751 (1994). Therefore, when applying intermediate scrutiny, this Court must examine (1) the governmental interests served by the [legislative classification], and (2) whether the classifications under the statute bear a substantial relationship to any such important interests. Corn v. New Mexico Educators Fed. Credit Union, 119 N.M. 199, 211, 889 P.2d 234, 246 (Apodaca, J., Specially Concurring), overruled on other grounds by Trujillo III, 1998-NMSC-031, ¶ 32. The burden is on the party supporting the legislation's constitutionality. Marrujo, 118 N.M. at 757, 887 P.2d at 751. The party supporting the constitutionality of the legislation must show that the discriminatory legislative classification is based on a reasoned analysis rather than through the mechanical application of traditional, often inaccurate, assumptions. See Miss. Univ. for Women v. Hogan, 458 U.S. 718, 726, 102 S.Ct. 3331, 73 L.Ed.2d 1090 (1982). {31} We balance the importance of the government interest against the burdens imposed on the individual and on society. See Trujillo I, 110 N.M. at 629, 798 P.2d at 579 (internal citation omitted). This can be accomplished by analyzing the overall purpose of the legislation at issue. The legislative goals, or what the legislation attempts to remedy or provide, will help to determine if the governmental interest is substantially related to the classification drawn. Id. at 630, 798 P.2d at 580. It will also allow the court to compare how the legislative classification treats the sensitive class vis-à-vis others similarly situated. The Court can better determine how heavily the sensitive class is burdened depending on how other persons similarly situated are treated by the legislation. {32} In examining whether there is a substantial relationship between the important governmental interests and the classifications drawn, the court will employ a least restrictive alternative analysis. However, this examination is not as exacting as would be used in strict scrutiny. Intermediate scrutiny, while allowing for a more flexible accommodation of legislative purposes than strict scrutiny, does not abandon totally the concern with over- and under-inclusiveness that, under strict scrutiny, is given form as the least restrictive alternative test. Trujillo I, 110 N.M. at 629, 798 P.2d at 579. Further, [w]hile the `least restrictive alternative' need not be selected if it poses serious practical difficulties in implementation, the existence of `less restrictive alternatives' is material to the determination of whether the classification substantially furthers an important governmental interest. Id. at 630, 798 P.2d at 580.