What standard is applied to content-based restrictions on speech?

The standard applied to content-based restrictions on speech is strict scrutiny. This high level of scrutiny is required because content-based laws are considered to directly impact the First Amendment rights related to free speech. Under strict scrutiny, the government must show that the law serves a compelling state interest and is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest.

This heightened scrutiny reflects the understanding that government should be cautious in regulating speech based on its content, as such regulations have the potential to suppress ideas and viewpoints. If a law discriminates based on what is being expressed, it is much more likely to infringe on free speech rights, prompting the need for a rigorous examination of the law's justification and the means employed to implement it.

In contrast, the other standards—intermediate scrutiny, rational basis review, and minimal scrutiny—apply in different contexts, typically involving less direct regulation of speech or different types of governmental interests. These standards require a less rigorous justification from the government and signal a lower level of protection for speech, which is not appropriate in cases of content-based restrictions.