Rational basis review is a standard used by courts to evaluate laws or government actions that do not involve fundamental rights or suspect classifications, such as race or religion. Under this review, the government must show that the law is rationally related to a legitimate government interest. This means that the law must have a reasonable connection to a goal that the government is allowed to pursue. In rational basis review, the burden of proof is on the challenger to demonstrate that the law is not rationally related to any legitimate interest. This standard is often applied in cases involving economic regulations or social policies, making it easier for the government to justify its actions compared to stricter scrutiny levels, like strict scrutiny or intermediate scrutiny.