No More Worries!

image Our orders are delivered strictly on time without delay

Paper Formatting

  • Double or single-spaced
  • 1-inch margin
  • 12 Font Arial or Times New Roman
  • 300 words per page

No Lateness!

image Our orders are delivered strictly on time without delay

Our Guarantees


  • Free Unlimited revisions
  • Guaranteed Privacy
  • Money Return guarantee
  • Plagiarism Free Writing


Visit the OWASP website.

Using WORD, write an ORIGINAL brief essay of 300 words or more describing the history and background of OWASP.

See the Vulnerabilities tab. Choose one of the vulnerabilities on the linked page and describe briefly.

Safe Assign is software that verifies the originality of your work against on-line sources and other students.

Sample Solution

his essay will evaluate what standard of review was actually applied by the U.S. Supreme Court in Korematsu v. United States. It is important to understand what standard of review was used because they are the lens through which a court judges constitutionality of a legislative classification. Depending upon which standard of review is applied, a court will either assume the legislative classification in question is constitutional or unconstitutional. If a court applies strict scrutiny standard of review, it carries a very strong presumption of unconstitutionality. However, if a court applies rational basis standard of review, there is a strong presumption of constitutionality. Furthermore, the type of review used, depicts what types of justification the side with the burden of proof is required to show. Thus, the standard of review used in a case has a serious impact on how the case will be decided. I believe the Supreme Court, in contrast to what Justice Black stated in his majority opinion, applied rational basis standard of review in Korematsu. The majority opinion in Korematsu v. United States is in opposition to my view that rational basis, not strict scrutiny was applied. In the case, the Court held that Executive Order 9066 was constitutional and passed strict scrutiny standard of review. They claimed the need to protect the country against espionage outweighed Korematsu's rights. In Justice Black's majority opinion he stated that Executive Order 9066 is a racial classification and therefore triggers strict scrutiny. Meaning, that in order to pass strict scrutiny standard of review, the state must have a compelling interest in making the legislative classification and show the legislative means are narrowly tailored to serve the legislative ends. In reviewing the case, the Court examined whether the state had a compelling interest to exclude and intern anyone of Japanese ancestry. The majority argued that pressing public necessity could justify racial restrictions when pure racial antagonism cannot (Choper, Fallon, Kamisar, and Shiffrin, 1202). They claimed national security was a compelling interest and that the military and congress acted constitutionally in creating the internment order. Ultimately, the majority concluded that national security concerns was a compelling enough interest to overcome the very strong presumption of unconstitutionality incorporated in strict scrutiny, the standard of review the majority claims to apply. Although the majority opinion spends a good deal of time explaining the state had a compelling interest, they barely address the part of strict scrutiny requiring the legislative means be narrowly tailored to the legislative ends. The only statement that vaguely addresses it is when Black writes that interning Japanese has a clear and close relationship to stopping espionage (Choper, Fallon, Kamisar, and Shiffrin, 1202). In my opinion, the Court could not have upheld

Price Calculator

Single spaced
approx 275 words per page
Total Cost:

12% Discount


  • Research Paper Writing
  • Essay Writing
  • Dissertation Writing
  • Thesis Writing

Why Choose Us


  • Money Return guarantee
  • Guaranteed Privacy
  • Written by Professionals
  • Paper Written from Scratch
  • Timely Deliveries
  • Free Amendments