West Virginia v. B. P. J. · ¶93

But that argument is basically the same as the plaintiffs’ first argument about the relationship between the laws’ classification and the States’ interests—just with different labeling. The plaintiffs’ as-applied argument posits that the States’ interests must justify the laws’ application to a specific subclass or individual. To be sure, the plaintiffs’ as- applied nomenclature and focus on subclasses is a useful construct in equal protection cases to help analyze the relationship between a State’s classification and the State’s asserted interests. Specifically, if a State’s interests do not apply to an especially large subclass within the class specified by the State’s law, then that fact may demonstrate that the relationship between the State’s classification and the State’s interests is not close enough. But as long as the relationship is sufficient as a general matter, the State is…

slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.