How (not why) is the higher drinking age not infringing rights?

How (not why, i don’t want to debate) is the higher drinking age not infringing rights? (USA)

Isn’t this a form of age discrimination? All reasons aside, i know its probably better to be higher than 18, but isn’t it discriminating?

Just curious (I am over 21) - but i never learned the legalities behind raising the age limit.

Thanks ahead of time

Yes, it’s a form of age discrimination. So is the voting age, and the driving age.

I think age discrimination is not illegal in and of itself - only when stipulated (like in hiring, provided person is old enough to work).

Try again guys.

You DO NOT have the right, constitutional or otherwise to drink alcohol or drive/operate a motor vehicle.

Having a drivers license is a privilege which can be taken away from you if you break certain laws.

Drinking is a privilege which can be taken away from you if you break certain laws.

i don’t see how drinking is in any way a priviledge.

driver’s license, sure. but drinking? wuh?!

First thing I learned in Driver’s Ed: driving is a privilege, not a right. It can be taken away from you. If it were a right, no one would ever have to take a driving test in order to obtain a license.

  • s.e.

I don’t understand it either. If you can drafted at 18, and can vote at 18, and get married even younger, what is the justification for preventing this particular thing? What else is prevented from ages 18 to 21?

I would have to argue. I would think that my ability to do anything that I want to my own body is a pretty fundemental right. Anything else is a restriction of my freedoms.

I am with you on driving, but the arguement just doesn’t work with me for drinking.

As far as jiving this with the OP, my understanding is that it is considerly legally acceptable to abridge someone’s personal freedoms if it is deemed in that person’s and societies best interest. I don’t agree with that, but that is my understanding.

Historically, 21 was considered the age of majority. The voting age was lowered to 18 during the Nixon administration

Thanks for the cuteness, WSLer, but I didn’t say you had the constitutional right to drink or drive.

The ‘right’ the OP was referring to was to not be a victim of age discrimination. I pointed out a citizen doesn’t have a general right to not be discriminated against by age.

Put the word ‘race’ or ‘sex’ in for ‘age,’ and it’s clear we’re not talking about a right to drink, we’re talking about the right to be treated the same.

ratato: Check the US Constitution for a couple of other age requirements.

Monty, specifying the age requirement for President does not abridge anyone’s general civil rights by age.

“nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” (U.S. Const., 14th Amendment)

My Bar Exam Constitutional Law is rusty, but here’s a sample. I’m sure someone will correct my errors.

The analysis has nothing to do with “rights” vs. “privileges”.

Basically states are free to restrict your right to liberty by law (via the state’s broad “police power”) unless the law infringes upon your “fundamental rights” (e.g., right to vote, etc.) Drinking is not a fundamental right. A law restricting something less that a fundamental right (e.g., drinking) need only be “rationally related to a legitimate government interest” to be constitutional. Here, the legitimate government interest is to protect youth from the s-called evils of alcohol. The age restriction is rationally related to that end. Therefore, the law limiting the age of drinkers does not violate the “due process clause” and is constitutional.

What about discimination under the “equal protection clause”? Well, unless the law discriminates agaist a “suspect class” of people, the above analysis is the same. A “suspect class” of people are basically those people who have been getting a raw deal for years and years (e.g., minority races, religions, and people from certain nations, etc.) Discrimination on the basis of age does not affect a suspect class (minors). Since the law barring minors from drinking doesn’t affect a suspect class, and it is rationally related to a legitimate government interest, that law doesn’t violate the equal protection clause either. The analysis would be totally different if the law prohibited Argentinian-Americans or Muslims from drinking, or what-have-you.

Bearflag70, nicely done. Thanks for the concise dope.

Oh boy - can’t believe I’m about to do this…

Monty, excellent point. I concur.

WSLer I don’t have the constitutional right to drive or drink? Where does the constitution say there are limitations that pertain to either?

Amendment XIV

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

According to this I am constitutionally allowed to drink and drive until the Gov’t makes other laws by due process.

Come on people. The 21 year old drinking laws in the states are purely because of federal government blackmail. They saiid…If you don’t raise your drinking age to 21 or we will not give you highway money.

Has nothing to do with rights or anything else.

Age discrimination laws do not cut in until age 40.

<hijack>
BTW, age discrimination complaints are way up. Apparently the culprits are Generation X & Y bosses who are discriminating against Baby Boomer employees.
</hijack>

Right on Reeder!

There is no federal law for any 21 year old drinking age. Each individual state simply raised theirs to avoid having federal highway money cut off. I am from Louisiana and it depends a lot on young tourism revenue (Mardi Gras and New Orleans in general). Louisiana skirted the 21 year old drinking age for many years by making it legal to sell to 18 - 20 year olds in stores and bars but making it illegal for them to buy. The kicker was that there was no penalty for buying at 18 - 20 either so this got around the federal regulations. That is the way it was while I was in college at Tulane although even though even the Louisiana legislature caved in about 1997 or so. Still, Louisiana has some of the most liberal underage drinking laws in the nation.

I’d say minors have been getting a raw deal for years and years.

There is no across-the-board age of majority. The states have different ages of consent for different purposes – sexual activity, marriage, consuming alcohol, getting a gun license, entering a binding contract, voting. Likewise, the federal government has its own ages of majority for military service.

It is erroneous to think that the age for voting is the golden standard around which all other ages of majority must conform.