Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections
Read the full opinion on CourtListener · The case as printed (Library of Congress)
Syllabus
The syllabus is prepared by the Reporter of Decisions and is not part of the opinion of the Court. It is shown as printed in the United States Reports, read from the text layer of the Library of Congress scan (optical character recognition in older volumes, not yet checked word by word against the page).
Appellants, Virginia residents, brought this action to have Virginia's poll tax declared unconstitutional. The three-judge District Court dismissed the complaint on the basis of Breedlove v. Suttles, 302 U. S. 277. Held: A State's conditioning of the right to vote on the payment of a fee or tax violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Breedlove v. Suttles, supra, pro tanto overruled. Pp. 665-670.
Printed on p. 663 of the United States Reports, read from the text layer of the Library of Congress scan. View the page image
(a) Once the franchise is granted to the electorate, lines which determine who may vote may not be drawn so as to cause invidious discrimination. Pp. 665-667.
Printed on p. 663 of the United States Reports, read from the text layer of the Library of Congress scan. View the page image
(b) Fee l)ayments or wealth, like race, creed, or color, are unrelated to the citizen's ability to participate intelligently in the electoral process. Pp. 666-668.
Printed on p. 663 of the United States Reports, read from the text layer of the Library of Congress scan. View the page image
(c) The interest of the State, when it comes to voting registration, is limited to the fixing of standards related to the applicant's qualifications as a voter. P. 668.
Printed on p. 663 of the United States Reports, read from the text layer of the Library of Congress scan. View the page image
(d) Lines drawn on the basis of wealth or property, like those of race, are traditionall'y disfavored. P. 668.
Printed on p. 663 of the United States Reports, read from the text layer of the Library of Congress scan. View the page image
(e) Classifications which might impinge on fundamental rights and liberties-such as the franchise-must be closely scrutinized. P. 670.
Printed on p. 663 of the United States Reports, read from the text layer of the Library of Congress scan. View the page image
240 F. Supp. 270, reversed.
Printed on p. 663 of the United States Reports, read from the text layer of the Library of Congress scan. View the page image
Provisions
The Constitution Annotated's essays on these provisions cite this case.
- Amendment XIV, Section 1suggested link
Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays Amdt14.S1.8.12.5, Amdt14.S1.8.13, Amdt14.S1.8.13.1, Amdt14.S1.8.6.1, Amdt14.S1.8.6.2, Amdt14.S1.8.6.4, Amdt14.S1.8.6.5, pp. 2251, 2253, 2258, 2306.
Overrules
- Breedlove v. Suttles (1937)suggested link
Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), Table of Supreme Court Decisions Overruled by Subsequent Decisions, p. 2444: Harper v. Virgina Board of Elections, 383 U.S. 663 (1966) — Breedlove v. Suttles, 302 U.S. 277 (1937).
Why it is here
The library's first set of cases is chosen by fixed rules from the Constitution Annotated (2022), which cites this case as “Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections, 383 U.S. 663 (1966)”:
- overrules Breedlove v. Suttles (table of overruled decisions)