Real biological differences can matter when they are relevant to the actual policy, but the classification still must fit the important objective rather than serve as a convenient stereotype. Suppose a state bars women from a public engineering program because officials believe most women will prefer other careers. The generalization does not substantially relate each applicant's sex to ability and is unlikely to satisfy the test. A sex-neutral physical requirement tied to the tasks students must perform presents a different question because it evaluates the relevant ability directly. In the equal-protection sequence, identify an express or purposeful sex classification before selecting intermediate scrutiny. Do not substitute strict scrutiny's compelling-interest and narrow-tailoring formula. Intermediate scrutiny is demanding, but its terms are an important objective and a substantial relationship, defended through the government's actual justification rather than a rationale invented after litigation begins.

Video lesson: Equal Protection: Crash Course Government and Politics #29