Completion Status: QUESTION 20 We know that the Fifteenth Amendment forbids prohibiting someone from voting on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude and the Nineteenth says a citizen shall not be denied the right to vote base on account of sex. To get around these restrictions, Congress decides to go back to the way it was when the US was founded. But instead of restricting based on race or sex which would be unconstitutional, Congress decides to restrict voting based on wealth. Would a law be constitutional if the law restricted voting to people with a net worth of over $500,000? [Without regard to race, national origin, or sex, of course.] The stated purpose is to ensure a more educated and informed electorate. Studies show that when a person has more wealth, they are better educated and more up-to-date on the news and what is going on in politics. Ca. The law would be constitutional but politically unpassable. b. Must pass strict scrutiny in order to be valid. c. Must have a rational relationship to the purpose for the law to be valid d. Must serve an important government interest to be valid