Ss Suspect Burdensome Discriminatory Fr B Women Quasi Suspect

Both EPC of 14th and DPC of 5th prohibit the denial of EP of the laws.

Is the classification (1) burdensome to FR (SS), (2) inherently suspect (SS), (3) quasi-suspect (IS), or (4) neither burdensome or suspect (RB)?

(1) Burdensome to FR (SS), rights to travel, vote, privacy, in 1st A  (see SDP cards)

(2) Suspect Classifications (SS):

-a- facially discriminatory or proven discriminatory in motive (uncon),

-b- discriminatory in application/impact, party challenging the law has burden of proving discriminatory purpose/motive (racially disproportionate impact not enough)

EX: race (SS), national origin (SS), affirmative action (see card), legal alien (SS), illegal alien (RB), kids of illegal aliens (RB+)  

(3) Quasi-Suspect (IS)

-a- gender: if smacks of stereotype, like no women in VMI, will be uncon; affirmative action for women is okay, if traditionally excluded from job (AA for elementary school teachers, NO; AA for women in construction, OK) 

-b- illegitimacy, less than suspect

-c- IS "exceedingly persuasive justification" (not compelling interest) + substantial relation   

(4) neither Burdensome nor Suspect (RB)

-a- RB "rationally related" to legitimate state purpose, don't need narrow tailoring

-b- wealth (can't be denied FR bc poor, in forma pauperis) and age