rational basis test in Illinois

2010In defining the rational basis test, this court stated that the legislative enactment must bear a “ ‘ “reasonable relationship to the public interest intended to be protected.” ’ ” (Emphasis added.) Lindner, 127 Ill. 2d at 180 , quoting People v. Wick, 107 Ill. 2d 62, 65-66 (1985), quoting Illinois Gamefowl Breeders Ass’n v. Block, 75 Ill. 2d 443, 453 (1979).

2010In defining the rational basis test, this court stated that the legislative enactment must bear a "`"reasonable relationship to the public interest intended to be protected."'" (Emphasis added.) Lindner, 127 Ill.2d at 180 , 129 Ill.Dec. 64 , 535 N.E.2d 829 , quoting People v. Wick, 107 Ill.2d 62, 65-66 , 89 Ill.Dec. 833 , 481 N.E.2d 676 (1985), quoting Illinois Gamefowl Breeders Ass'n v. Block, 75 Ill.2d 443, 453 , 27 Ill.Dec. 465 , 389 N.E.2d 529 (1979).

2024Under this test, our inquiry is twofold: “[W]e must determine whether there is a legitimate state interest behind the legislation, and if so, whether there is a reasonable relationship between that interest and the means the legislature has chosen to pursue it.” People v. Johnson, 225 Ill. 2d 573, 584 (2007). ¶ 46 Although the rational basis test is not “ ‘toothless’ ” (People v. Jones, 223 Ill. 2d 569, 596 (2006), quoting Mathews v. De Castro, 429 U.S. 181, 185 (1976)), it is nevertheless highly deferential to the findings of the legislature (People v. Rizzo, 2016 IL 118599 , ¶ 45).

2024However, under the rational basis test, courts “will not question the wisdom” of the General Assembly’s choice in enacting legislation because “a statute need not be the best method of accomplishing a legislative goal; it must - 16 - simply be reasonable.” Id. at 592 . “[T]he rational basis test does not require narrow tailoring; it only requires rationality.” Pepitone, 2018 IL 122034, ¶ 30 ; see also Moline School District No. 40 Board of Education v. Quinn, 2016 IL 119704, ¶ 28 (“the fact that a law might be ill-conceived does not, in itself, create a constitutional problem for us to fix, fo

2022Under the rational basis test, we will uphold legislation that “bears a reasonable relationship to a public interest to be served, and the means adopted are a reasonable method of accomplishing the desired objective.” Id.

2022To satisfy this test, a statute must only bear a “reasonable relationship” to the public purpose that the legislature intended to accomplish, and “the means adopted” must be “a 8 No. 1-19-2595 reasonable method of accomplishing the desired objective.’ ” Wright, 194 Ill. 2d at 24 (quoting People v. Adams, 144 Ill. 2d 381, 390 (1991)). ¶ 22 In the present case, the parties on appeal agree that the statute at issue does not affect a fundamental right,1 and that therefore any compliance with substantive due process must be determined under the rational basis test.

2025As the Illinois Supreme Court stated: “In applying the rational basis test, we must identify the public interest that the statute was intended to protect, determine whether the statute bears a reasonable relationship to that interest, and verify whether the means chosen to protect that interest are reasonable. [Citation.] As long as there is a reasonably conceivable set of facts showing that the legislation is rational, it must be upheld. [Citation.] Whether the statute is wise or sets forth the best means to achieve the desired result are matters for the legislature, not the courts.” Hayashi

2025As the Illinois Supreme Court stated: “In applying the rational basis test, we must identify the public interest that the statute was intended to protect, determine whether the statute bears a reasonable relationship to that interest, and verify whether the means chosen to protect that interest are reasonable. [Citation.] As long as there is a reasonably conceivable set of facts showing that the legislation is rational, it must be upheld. [Citation.] Whether the statute is wise or sets forth the best means to achieve the desired result are matters for the legislature, not the courts.” Hayashi

2022Id., see also People v. Wright, 194 Ill. 2d 1, 24 (2000). ¶ 23 On appeal, the petitioner contends that section 17-2(b)(3) does not meet the rational basis test because, as written, it is not reasonably related to accomplishing a legitimate state purpose.

2016A statute will be upheld under the rational basis test where "it bears a reasonable relationship to a public interest to be served, and the means adopted are a reasonable method of accomplishing the desired objective." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id. at 267-68 (quoting People v. Wright, 194 Ill. 2d 1, 24 (2000), quoting People v. Adams, 144 Ill. 2d 381, 390 (1991)). ¶ 22 The armed habitual criminal statute creates a Class X felony offense for any person who possesses a firearm if they have been previously twice-convicted of a list of enumerated felony offenses, including all forcible f

2018See Jacobson v. Department of Public Aid, 171 Ill. 2d 314, 323 (1996) (stating that the rational basis test asks “whether the method or means employed in the statute to achieve the stated goal or purpose of the legislation is rationally related to that goal”); DeGrazio v. Civil Service Comm’n of the City of Chicago, 31 Ill. 2d 482, 485 (1964) (“A further test of the validity of a law or regulation is whether it is a reasonable method to accomplish a certain objective.”); Schuringa v. City of Chicago, 30 Ill. 2d 504, 509 (1964) (“Equally settled and certain is the concept that a police [power]

2007See People v. Reed, 148 Ill. 2d 1, 11 (1992), citing People v. Lindner, 127 Ill. 2d 174, 180 (1989); Jacobson v. Department of Public Aid, 171 Ill. 2d 314, 323 (1996) (the rational basis test asks “whether the method or means employed in the statute to achieve the stated goal or purpose of the legislation is rationally related to that goal”); People v. Adams, 144 Ill. 2d 381, 390 (1991) (the statute must bear “a reasonable relationship to a public interest to be served, and the means adopted are a reasonable method of accomplishing the desired objective”).

2018See Jacobson v. Department of Public Aid, 171 Ill. 2d 314, 323 (1996) (stating that the rational basis test asks “whether the method or means employed in the statute to achieve the stated goal or purpose of the legislation is rationally related to that goal”); DeGrazio v. Civil Service Comm’n of the City of Chicago, 31 Ill. 2d 482, 485 (1964) (“A further test of the validity of a law or regulation is whether it is a reasonable method to accomplish a certain objective.”); Schuringa v. City of Chicago, 30 Ill. 2d 504, 509 (1964) (“Equally settled and certain is the concept that a police [power]

2016Under the rational basis test, a court asks only if "the method or means employed in the statute to achieve the stated goal or purpose of the legislation is rationally related to that goal." Jacobson, 171 Ill. 2d at 323 .

2025“Under the rational basis test, the court may hypothesize reasons for the legislation, even if the reasoning advanced did not 10 motivate the legislative action.” Lumpkin, 184 Ill. 2d at 124 .

2025To apply the rational basis test, “a court must first ascertain the purpose of the statute to determine whether the statute’s provisions reasonably implement that purpose.” Id. ¶ 62 (citing In re M.A., 2015 IL 118049, ¶ 55 ).

2002“Legislation challenged in this court benefits from a presumption of constitutionality. [Citation.] Courts examining the constitutional validity of a statute will ordinarily apply the rational basis test. [Citation.] Under this test, a statute will be upheld if it bears a rational relationship to a legitimate legislative purpose and is neither arbitrary nor discriminatory. [Citation.] Where challenged legislation implicates a fundamental constitutional right, however, such as the right to vote, the presumption of constitutionality is lessened and a far more demanding scrutiny is required. [Cit

2002“Legislation challenged in this court benefits from a presumption of constitutionality. [Citation.] Courts examining the constitutional validity of a statute will ordinarily apply the rational basis test. [Citation.] Under this test, a statute will be upheld if it bears a rational relationship to a legitimate legislative purpose and is neither arbitrary nor discriminatory. [Citation.] Where challenged legislation implicates a fundamental constitutional right, however, such as the right to vote, the presumption of constitutionality is lessened and a far more demanding scrutiny is required. [Cit

2017Our supreme court has explained: “Under the rational basis test, a court’s review of a legislative classification is limited and generally deferential. [Citation.] The legislature, under the State’s police power, has wide discretion to classify offenses and prescribe penalties for those offenses. [Citation.] Thus, if any state of facts can reasonably be conceived to justify the enactment, it must be upheld. [Citations.]” Id. at 502 , 605 N.E.2d at 525 .

2017Our supreme court has explained: “Under the rational basis test, a court’s review of a legislative classification is limited and generally deferential. [Citation.] The legislature, under the State’s police power, has wide discretion to classify offenses and prescribe penalties for those offenses. [Citation.] Thus, if any state of facts can reasonably be conceived to justify the enactment, it must be upheld. [Citations.]” Id. at 502 , 605 N.E.2d at 525 .

2024“Under strict scrutiny analysis, legislation which significantly interferes with the exercise of a fundamental right will be upheld only if it is necessary to promote a compelling state interest and is narrowly tailored to effectuate only that interest.” Id. ¶ 36 “Where the statute does not affect a fundamental constitutional right, the test for determining whether the statute complies with substantive due process is the rational basis test.” In re J.W., 204 Ill. 2d at 67 .

2024However, under the rational basis test, courts “will not question the wisdom” of the General Assembly’s choice in enacting legislation because “a statute need not be the best method of accomplishing a legislative goal; it must - 16 - simply be reasonable.” Id. at 592 . “[T]he rational basis test does not require narrow tailoring; it only requires rationality.” Pepitone, 2018 IL 122034, ¶ 30 ; see also Moline School District No. 40 Board of Education v. Quinn, 2016 IL 119704, ¶ 28 (“the fact that a law might be ill-conceived does not, in itself, create a constitutional problem for us to fix, fo

1994Under the rational basis test, the court may hypothesize reasons for the legislation, even if the reasoning advanced did not motivate the legislative action. ( Illinois Health Care Assoc. v. Department of Public Health (7th Cir.1989), 879 F.2d 286 .) Because the court may on its own initiative articulate the facts necessary to justify the legislation, the question of whether the legislation is constitutional is a question of law for the court to determine. ( Szczurek v. Park Ridge (1981), 97 Ill.App.3d 649 , 52 Ill.Dec. 698 , 422 N.E.2d 907 .) If there is any conceivable basis for finding a ra

1994Under the rational basis test, the court may hypothesize reasons for the legislation, even if the reasoning advanced did not motivate the legislative action. ( Illinois Health Care Assoc. v. Department of Public Health (7th Cir.1989), 879 F.2d 286 .) Because the court may on its own initiative articulate the facts necessary to justify the legislation, the question of whether the legislation is constitutional is a question of law for the court to determine. ( Szczurek v. Park Ridge (1981), 97 Ill.App.3d 649 , 52 Ill.Dec. 698 , 422 N.E.2d 907 .) If there is any conceivable basis for finding a ra

2020Id. “[J]udicial review of legislative classifications is limited and generally deferential; the court simply inquires whether the method or means employed in the statute to achieve the stated goal or purpose of the legislation is rationally related to that goal.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id. “ ‘The classification must be upheld if any set of facts can reasonably be conceived to justify it.’ ” Id. (quoting Russell v. Department of Natural Resources, 183 Ill. 2d 434, 447 (1998)).

2013Russell v. Department of Natural Resources, 183 Ill. 2d 434, 446 (1998).

2020See Cornelius, 213 Ill. 2d at 204-05 (finding under the rational basis test, the notification provisions of the 2002 version of the Act bore a rational relationship to the purpose of the Act and Notification Law—to assist law enforcement and to protect the public from sex offenders— stating “we find nothing unreasonable in the methods of serving the intended purposes of the statutes ***[concluding] there is a rational relationship between the disclosure of sex offender - 17 - 1-18-1060 registration information via the Internet and the goals of protecting the public and assisting law enforcemen

2019Id. ¶ 21 Defendant next asserts that even if a fundamental right is not at play, the SORA statutory scheme violates substantive due process under rational basis review. ¶ 22 “The rational basis test is satisfied where the challenged statute bears a rational relationship to the purpose the legislature intended to achieve in enacting the statute.” Cornelius, 213 Ill. 2d at 203-04 . -7- 1-17-0117 ¶ 23 While defendant acknowledges that the State has a legitimate interest in protecting the public, particularly children, from sex offenders, defendant asserts that the SORA statutory scheme is not rat

2026“Applying the rational basis test, we must determine (1) whether there is a legitimate state interest behind the statute and, if so, (2) whether there is a reasonable relationship between the interest and the means the legislature has chosen to pursue it.” Id. (citing Pepitone, 2018 IL 122034, ¶ 14 ).

2026“Although it is not toothless, the rational basis test is highly deferential to the findings of the legislature.” Id. (citing Pepitone, 2018 IL 122034, ¶ 17 ; People v. Jones, 223 Ill. 2d 569, 596 (2006)).

2026“Although it is not toothless, the rational basis test is highly deferential to the findings of the legislature.” Id. (citing Pepitone, 2018 IL 122034, ¶ 17 ; People v. Jones, 223 Ill. 2d 569, 596 (2006)).

2024Under this test, our inquiry is twofold: “[W]e must determine whether there is a legitimate state interest behind the legislation, and if so, whether there is a reasonable relationship between that interest and the means the legislature has chosen to pursue it.” People v. Johnson, 225 Ill. 2d 573, 584 (2007). ¶ 46 Although the rational basis test is not “ ‘toothless’ ” (People v. Jones, 223 Ill. 2d 569, 596 (2006), quoting Mathews v. De Castro, 429 U.S. 181, 185 (1976)), it is nevertheless highly deferential to the findings of the legislature (People v. Rizzo, 2016 IL 118599 , ¶ 45).

2025Id. ¶¶ 36, 56. ¶ 27 “When applying the rational basis test, our inquiry is twofold: we must determine whether there is a legitimate governmental interest behind the legislation and, if so, whether there is a reasonable relationship between that interest and the means the governing body has chosen to pursue it.” LMP Services, 2019 IL 123123, ¶ 17 ; accord Hanna II, 2013 IL App (1st) 121701-U , ¶ 59 (citing Village of Lake Villa v. Stokovich, 211 Ill. 2d 106, 125-26 (2004)).

2018Village of Lake Villa v. Stokovich, 211 Ill. 2d 106, 122 (2004). ¶ 61 While not “toothless,” the rational basis test is highly deferential.

2007The rational basis test "requires only that there be a reasonable relationship between the challenged legislation and a conceivable, [even though] unarticulated, governmental interest." Cutinello v. Whitley, 161 Ill. 2d 409, 420 , 641 N.E.2d 360, 365 (1994).

2007The rational basis test "requires only that there be a reasonable relationship between the challenged legislation and a conceivable, [even though] unarticulated, governmental interest." Cutinello v. Whitley, 161 Ill. 2d 409, 420 , 641 N.E.2d 360, 365 (1994).

2023See Harris v. Manor Healthcare Corp., 111 Ill. 2d 350, 368 (1986) (“When the statute under consideration does not affect a fundamental constitutional right, the appropriate level of scrutiny is the rational-basis test.”).

2023People v. Masterson, 2011 IL 110072, ¶ 24 . ¶ 22 “Under the rational-basis test, judicial review of legislative classifications is limited and generally deferential ***.” In re A.A., 181 Ill. 2d 32 , 38 (1998). “[A] challenged classification may be invalidated only if it is arbitrary or bears no reasonable relationship to the pursuit of a legitimate State goal.” People v. P.H., 145 Ill. 2d 209, 229 (1991) (citing Harris v. Manor Healthcare Corp., 111 Ill. 2d 350, 371 (1986)).

2015Best, 179 Ill. 2d at 394 (providing that where a public act does not affect a fundamental right or suspect or quasi-suspect classification, the appropriate standard of review is the rational basis test).

2015Best, 179 Ill. 2d at 394 (providing that where a public act does not affect a fundamental right or suspect or quasi-suspect classification, the appropriate standard of review is the rational basis test).

2023People v. Masterson, 2011 IL 110072, ¶ 24 . ¶ 22 “Under the rational-basis test, judicial review of legislative classifications is limited and generally deferential ***.” In re A.A., 181 Ill. 2d 32 , 38 (1998). “[A] challenged classification may be invalidated only if it is arbitrary or bears no reasonable relationship to the pursuit of a legitimate State goal.” People v. P.H., 145 Ill. 2d 209, 229 (1991) (citing Harris v. Manor Healthcare Corp., 111 Ill. 2d 350, 371 (1986)).

2006Our supreme court has articulated this test as follows: “Under this rational basis test, ‘judicial review of legislative classifications is limited and generally deferential; the court simply inquires whether the method or means employed in the statute to achieve the stated goal or purpose of the legislation is rationally related to that goal.’ In re A.A., 181 Ill. 2d 32 , 38 (1998).

2017The rational basis test, which the parties concede is that test to be applied here (Majid v. Retirement Board of Policemen’s Annuity & Benefit Fund, 2015 IL App (1st) 132182, ¶ 48 (“[t]he deferential rational basis test applies to a statutory classification that does not affect fundamental rights or create a suspect classification”)), “simply inquires whether the means employed by the statute to achieve the stated purpose of the legislation are rationally related to that goal.” People v. Breedlove, 213 Ill. 2d 509, 518 (2004).

2016The rational basis test, which the parties concede is that test to be applied here (Majid v. Retirement Board of Policemen’s Annuity & Benefit Fund, 2015 IL App (1st) 132182, ¶ 48 (“[t]he deferential rational basis test applies to a statutory classification that does not affect fundamental rights or create a suspect classification”)), “simply inquires whether the means employed by the statute to achieve the stated purpose of the legislation are rationally related to that goal.” People v. Breedlove, 213 Ill. 2d 509, 518 (2004).

2002Vernon Hills, 168 Ill.2d at 122 , 212 Ill.Dec. 883 , 658 N.E.2d 365 ; see Cutinello, 161 Ill.2d at 420 , 204 Ill.Dec. 136 , 641 N.E.2d 360 (the rational basis test requires only a reasonable relationship between the challenged legislation and a conceivable, even though unarticulated, governmental interest).

2002Vernon Hills, 168 Ill.2d at 122 , 212 Ill.Dec. 883 , 658 N.E.2d 365 ; see Cutinello, 161 Ill.2d at 420 , 204 Ill.Dec. 136 , 641 N.E.2d 360 (the rational basis test requires only a reasonable relationship between the challenged legislation and a conceivable, even though unarticulated, governmental interest).

2015See People v. Alcozer, 241 Ill. 2d 248, 262-63 (2011); In re Detention of Samuelson, 189 Ill. 2d at 562 (judicial review of legislative classifications under the rational basis test is limited and generally deferential). ¶ 42 As mentioned, Illinois appellate courts have upheld the validity of the AUUW statute since its enactment, finding that the state has a legitimate interest in protecting the public and the police from the possession and use of dangerous weapons.

2002App. 3d 960 , 706 N.E.2d 539 (1999), and In re Detention of Samuelson, 189 Ill. 2d 548 , 727 N.E.2d 228 (2000), do not support the State’s argument that the rational basis test should be used in examining the constitutionality of the Act, because these decisions pertain to whether the statutory classifications created by the Act and the Illinois Sexually Violent Persons Commitment Act violate equal protection.

2025When neither a fundamental right nor a suspect classification is implicated, the rational basis standard applies, which requires a determination of “whether the statute bears a rational relationship to a legitimate government purpose.” Id.

2023People v. Masterson, 2011 IL 110072, ¶ 24 . ¶ 22 “Under the rational-basis test, judicial review of legislative classifications is limited and generally deferential ***.” In re A.A., 181 Ill. 2d 32 , 38 (1998). “[A] challenged classification may be invalidated only if it is arbitrary or bears no reasonable relationship to the pursuit of a legitimate State goal.” People v. P.H., 145 Ill. 2d 209, 229 (1991) (citing Harris v. Manor Healthcare Corp., 111 Ill. 2d 350, 371 (1986)).