Home › Case briefs › Constitutional Law

Foley v. Connelie

Supreme Court of the United States · 1978 · Constitutional Law

Constitutional LawEqual ProtectionAlienage classificationsPublic employmentEqual Protection Clausealienagecitizenship requirementstate police

Facts

New York Executive Law § 215(3) provides that no person shall be appointed to the New York state police force unless he is a citizen of the United States. Foley, a lawful permanent resident alien eligible in due course for naturalization, applied to become a New York State trooper, but state authorities refused to let him take the competitive examination because he was not a citizen. Some members of Foley's class were not yet eligible for citizenship because of federal waiting periods, and state law also imposed an age limit for the position. New York state troopers exercise broad law-enforcement authority, including crime prevention and detection, arrests, searches, seizures, execution of warrants, and the use of lawful force, and they are on call at all times.

Issue

Whether a state may, consistent with the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, limit appointment to its state police force to citizens of the United States. More specifically, the question was whether this alienage classification required strict scrutiny or only a rational relationship to a legitimate state interest because of the nature of the police function.

Rule

Although alienage classifications often receive close judicial scrutiny, strict scrutiny is not required when a State excludes aliens from important nonelective positions involving discretionary decisionmaking or the execution of broad public policy that substantially affects members of the political community. For such positions, the State need show only some rational relationship between the interest sought to be protected and the citizenship classification, and each position must be examined to determine whether it falls within that category.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

Colorado requires all applicants for the state highway patrol to be United States citizens. Patrol officers in Denver and across the state may stop vehicles, make warrantless arrests in certain circumstances, execute warrants, conduct searches incident to law enforcement duties, and use lawful force while enforcing state law.

If a lawful permanent resident challenges the citizenship requirement under the Equal Protection Clause, which standard is most likely to apply?

Explanation. The majority held that strict scrutiny is not required for alienage classifications involving important nonelective positions whose holders participate directly in the formulation, execution, or review of broad public policy. Police officers qualify because they exercise broad discretionary powers—arrests, searches, seizures, and use of force—that substantially affect members of the political community. For such positions, the State need show only some rational relationship between citizenship and the position.