What did the Court say about minority-owned program preferences under state law in Adarand v. Pena?

• A. They pass rational basis review
• B. They are inherently suspect and must pass strict scrutiny
• C. They are automatically permissible
• D. They require a constitutional amendment

Answer: (B)

Racial classifications used by government programs are subject to strict scrutiny. In Adarand v. Pena, the Court held that any preference or advantage given to minority‑owned firms under state law is inherently suspect and must be justified under strict scrutiny. That means such a policy must serve a compelling government interest and be narrowly tailored to achieve that interest, using the least restrictive means available. Rational-basis review is not enough, and these programs are not automatically permissible. The decision extended the strict-scrutiny standard to state actions as well as federal ones, so minority-preference schemes must meet that heightened standard to be constitutional.