LEC真题演练 | Levels of Judicial Scrutiny

Bev and Nate had lived together for several years, but had never married because Nate was still married to another woman. During this time, Bev was not employed, but she took care of their home, did housekeeping and other chores, and acted as Nateʼs companion. Nate, however, informed her one day that he did not want to live with her anymore and told her to move out of the residence.

During the time Nate and Bev lived together, they had accumulated property. The state in which they lived recognized in general the validity of property agreements entered into by nonmarried couples who lived together, but there was a statute that provided that such agreements were void as being against public policy when one of the parties living together was married to another. Bev brought suit against Nate, alleging that they had an agreement to share equally all property accumulated by them during the time they lived together, and challenging the constitutionality of the statute. The state intervened to defend the statute.

Will Bev prevail in her challenge to the statute?

A. Yes, if the state fails to prove that the statute is rationally related to legitimate state purpose.

B. Yes, if Bev can prove that the statute is not necessary to effectuate a compelling state interest.

C. No, if Bev fails to prove that the statute is not rationally related to a legitimate governing purpose.

D. No, if the government proves that the statute was necessary and proper.