A mayor serving in a major metropolitan area receives an internal memorandum indicating personnel at many police stations are single-race. At the time of the report, thirty percent of the police force was black or Hispanic. She immediately calls a press conference and orders transfers of police officers to achieve racial balance across the city. The transferred police officers sue on constitutional grounds. Assuming just these facts, what is the strongest argument that might be advanced by the transferred officers based on constitutional grounds?
A) Executive action by the mayor is unconstitutional because there was no rational relationship to a valid governmental purpose.
B) The action is "void for vagueness" since transferred police officers must unnecessarily guess at the underlying public policy of the transfer process.
C) The mayor's policy used race as the basis for transfers, and assignments are subject to strict scrutiny.
D) The transfer can be set aside based on intermediate or heightened level of scrutiny.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The strongest argument that the transferred police officers might advance is that the Mayor's policy used race as the basis for transfers, and assignments are subject to strict scrutiny. This means that the transfers must serve a compelling government interest and be narrowly tailored to achieve that interest, and must have used the least restrictive means possible. The fact that the Mayor ordered transfers solely to achieve racial balance suggests that race was the determining factor and not job performance or qualifications. As a result, this policy may not meet the strict scrutiny test and could be found unconstitutional.

A Mayor Serving in a Major Metropolitan Area Receives an Internal