FedSoc Forums

Tiwari v. Friedlander: Which Rational Basis Test is it Anyway?


Listen Later

In Tiwari v. Friedlander, the Petitioners ask the Supreme Court to grant certiorari to address whether the Fourteenth Amendment requires meaningful review of restrictions on the right to engage in a common occupation. The petition argues that the right to engage in a common occupation is deeply rooted in the nation’s history and tradition, but its protection has been inconsistent, sometimes leading to conflicting results across the lower courts. The petition also contends this inconsistency is caused by the standard under which courts review economic-liberty challenges— the rational basis test.
The Petitioners, Dipendra Tiwari and Kishor Sapkota, challenge Kentucky’s Certificate-of-Need (CON) Law as an unconstitutional infringement on their right to earn an honest living. The CON law prevents them from opening a healthcare agency they designed to provide home services to the large community of Nepali-speaking refugees and immigrants in Louisville. By contrast, Kentucky contends that the CON law is necessary for lowering competitive pressure and increasing profits for incumbents who can pass their gains to the public.
The petition raises questions about the proper articulation of the rational basis test and whether the right to engage in a common occupation is deeply rooted in history and tradition under the Court’s recent landmark decision Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.
Which Rational Basis Test is it anyway? Is the Right to Engage in a Common Occupation Deeply Rooted in History and Tradition and does the Fourteenth Amendment Guarantee Meaningful Protection for that Right?
To discuss the petition and these questions, please join the lead attorney for the Petitioners, Andrew H. Ward, attorney at the Institute for Justice, and Professor David Upham, Director of Legal Studies and Associate Professor at the University of Dallas.
Featuring:
--Andrew Ward, Attorney, Institute for Justice
--Prof. David Upham, Director of Legal Studies & Associate Professor, University of Dallas
--Moderator: Adam Griffin, Law Clerk, US District Courts
...more
View all episodesView all episodes
Download on the App Store

FedSoc ForumsBy The Federalist Society

  • 4.5
  • 4.5
  • 4.5
  • 4.5
  • 4.5

4.5

82 ratings


More shows like FedSoc Forums

View all
We the People by National Constitution Center

We the People

1,101 Listeners

Cato Daily Podcast by Cato Institute

Cato Daily Podcast

961 Listeners

FedSoc Events by The Federalist Society

FedSoc Events

88 Listeners

SCOTUScast by The Federalist Society

SCOTUScast

106 Listeners

City Journal Audio by Manhattan Institute

City Journal Audio

598 Listeners

Faculty Division Bookshelf by The Federalist Society

Faculty Division Bookshelf

8 Listeners

Law Talk With Epstein, Yoo & Cooke by Ricochet

Law Talk With Epstein, Yoo & Cooke

675 Listeners

WSJ Opinion: Potomac Watch by Paul Gigot, The Wall Street Journal

WSJ Opinion: Potomac Watch

2,792 Listeners

U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments by Oyez

U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments

677 Listeners

The Editors by National Review

The Editors

4,787 Listeners

Heritage Explains by Heritage Podcast Network

Heritage Explains

823 Listeners

RTP's Fourth Branch Podcast by The Federalist Society

RTP's Fourth Branch Podcast

28 Listeners

Necessary & Proper Podcast by The Federalist Society

Necessary & Proper Podcast

47 Listeners

The McCarthy Report by National Review

The McCarthy Report

2,807 Listeners

Advisory Opinions by The Dispatch

Advisory Opinions

3,754 Listeners

Amarica's Constitution by Akhil Reed Amar

Amarica's Constitution

372 Listeners

Capital Record by National Review

Capital Record

430 Listeners

Divided Argument by Will Baude, Dan Epps

Divided Argument

666 Listeners

Supreme Court Oral Arguments by scotusstats.com

Supreme Court Oral Arguments

17 Listeners