Hello, I am dyslexic and I am finding it hard to choose relevant case law for this question I need some guidance on which law is better for the question. (Please answer the question fully with an explanation of the relevant case law)

Gender Reed v. Reed, Frontiero v. Richardson, Craig v. Boren, U.S. v. Virginia, Michael M. v. Superior Court of Sonoma County, Sessions v. Morales-Santana

Other Protected and Unprotected Categories San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, Gregory v. Ashcroft, Romer v. Evans, Griswold v. Connecticut

Due Process Clause and the Right to Privacy Roe v. Wade (Vol. II, pgs. 352-358), Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, Bowers v. Hardwick, Lawrence v. Texas, Obergefell v. Hodges, Pavan v. Smith, Bostock v. Clayton County, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization

Race and State Action Shelley v. Kraemer, Burton v. Wilmington Parking Authority, Moose Lodge No. 107 v. Irvis

Race and Remedies Brown v. Board of Education II (Vol. II, pgs. 536-538), Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co., Grutter v. Bollinger, Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1, Fisher v. University of Texas II

Question: The Court has long struggled in the area of equal protection with the three-tiered framework based on Footnote Four in Carolene Products. Identify three specific cases where the Court was faced with challenges in determining the appropriate test to apply and explain why those cases in particular were difficult. Given these challenges, do you think the Court is better off abandoning the three tiered framework for some other approach or do the advantages of the current structure outweigh the costs? If you think that the Court should adopt another approach, what approach do you think that should be? If you think that it should retain the current framework, how would you address the criticisms offered?