context: The right to equal protection under the United States and Minnesota Constitutions guarantees that people who are similarly situated are treated alike; thus to establish a denial of equal protection, a defendant must first show that similarly situated people have been treated differently.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.parenthetical: stating that the guarantee of equal protection does not forbid classifications, but "simply keeps governmental decisionmakers from treating differently persons who are in all relevant respects alike"
citation_a.sentence: State v. Cox, 798 N.W.2d 517, 521-22 (Minn.2011) (stating that “we have routinely rejected equal-protection claims when a party cannot establish that he or she is similarly situated to those whom they contend are being treated differently”); see also Nordlinger v. Hahn, 505 U.S. 1, 10, 112 S.Ct. 2326, 2331, 120 L.Ed.2d 1 (1992) (stating that the guarantee of equal protection does not forbid classifications, but “simply keeps governmental decisionmakers from treating differently persons who are in all relevant respects alike”).
citation_b.signal: no signal
citation_b.identifier: 798 N.W.2d 517, 521-22
citation_b.parenthetical: stating that "we have routinely rejected equal-protection claims when a party cannot establish that he or she is similarly situated to those whom they contend are being treated differently"
citation_b.sentence: State v. Cox, 798 N.W.2d 517, 521-22 (Minn.2011) (stating that “we have routinely rejected equal-protection claims when a party cannot establish that he or she is similarly situated to those whom they contend are being treated differently”); see also Nordlinger v. Hahn, 505 U.S. 1, 10, 112 S.Ct. 2326, 2331, 120 L.Ed.2d 1 (1992) (stating that the guarantee of equal protection does not forbid classifications, but “simply keeps governmental decisionmakers from treating differently persons who are in all relevant respects alike”).