Home › Case briefs › Constitutional Law

Johnson v. California

Supreme Court of the United States · 2005 · Constitutional Law

Constitutional LawEqual ProtectionPrison AdministrationRacial ClassificationsEqual Protection Clausestrict scrutinyracial segregationprisons

Facts

The California Department of Corrections had an unwritten policy of racially segregating prisoners in double cells in reception centers for up to 60 days whenever they entered a new facility. Race was a predominant factor in assignment, and the Department admitted that the chance of a prisoner receiving a cellmate of another race was nearly zero. California justified the policy as necessary to prevent violence associated with racial prison gangs. Johnson, an African-American inmate, alleged that each time he entered or was transferred within the system he was assigned a same-race cellmate under this policy.

Issue

What standard of review applies to an equal protection challenge to a prison policy that expressly classifies and segregates inmates by race in reception-center double cells? Specifically, should the policy be reviewed under strict scrutiny or under Turner's deferential reasonable-relationship standard for prison regulations?

Rule

All government-imposed racial classifications must be analyzed under strict scrutiny, including those used in prisons. In the prison context, prison security and discipline can qualify as a compelling governmental interest, but the government must still prove that any race-based policy is narrowly tailored to serve that interest; Turner does not displace strict scrutiny for racial classifications.

🔒

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.

At a state intake prison in Columbus, Ohio, officials use a written policy requiring every newly admitted inmate to share a temporary cell only with someone of the same race for the first 21 days. The warden says the rule reduces gang-related violence while officials gather background information.

If an inmate challenges the policy under the Equal Protection Clause, what standard should a court apply?

Explanation. The governing rule is that all government-imposed racial classifications are subject to strict scrutiny, including in prisons. The majority rejected using Turner's deferential reasonable-relationship test for an equal protection challenge to an express race-based prison housing policy. A temporary security rationale does not change the standard; prison security may be a compelling interest, but the policy must still be narrowly tailored.