that explicitly classifies people based on sex is subject to intermediate scrutiny, which means 'it must be established at least that the challenged classification serves important governmental objecfives and that the discriminatory means employed are substantially related to the achievement of those objectives.’ ”) (quoting Nguyen v. INS, 533 U.S. 53, 60, 121 S.Ct. 2053, 150 L.Ed.2d 115 (2001)). 10 . Seemingly in an effort to move its equal protection claim into the realm of strict scrutiny, EIA attempts to argue that its members’ "associational rights” under the First Amendment have been harmed by the Three-Part Test. However, EIA can cite to no authority for applying First Amendment case law in this context. Thus, the district court properly rejec 2 S.Ct. 488, 36 L.Ed. 285 (1892) (<HOLDING>). 14 . The cases cited by EIA are of no avail.
holding that the united states may bring suit against a state to enforce compliance with federal law recognizing federal constitutional claim against the united states holding that six employees bringing suit under title vii were not in privity with the united states which had brought a previous suit against the same employer because the employees sought a type of relief which the united states had not sought holding a suit against an agency of the state is a suit against the state holding that to the extent compliance with the flsa interferes with the state budgetary process that interference is caused by state law not federal law