Practice question
An ordinance substantially restricts minors' exercise of a fundamental right. In litigation, the city requests rational-basis review solely because affected persons are under eighteen. It offers evidence relevant to child welfare but refuses to explain the breadth of its restrictions. Which approach follows SPARK?
- Apply strict scrutiny; minority may inform the compelling-interest and tailoring analysis but does not by itself lower the level of review.
- Apply no constitutional review to minors.
- Apply rational basis automatically whenever children are affected.
- Hold the ordinance valid solely because its purpose mentions welfare.
- Invalidate it without examining either interest or means simply because minors are involved.
Legal references
- SPARK v. Quezon City, G.R. No. 225442, August 8, 2017, main decision, strict scrutiny: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/63300
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.