Introduction - who can vote and who cannot

Minor

Overturned by the 19th amendment (grants women the right to vote).

26th age

18 you can vote

19th amendment

gender

Article I section II

voting rules

Much litigation over

§1 of 14th amendment (privileges and immunities of citizenship and equal protection). 1st amendment too

Why they prisoners should be disenfranchised:

• Broke the social K • Only moral people should vote • E,g, Green • Responsibility

Indian Citizen Act of 1924

conferred citizenship to all Indians • Voting rights then extended to Indians because they were citizens. overturns Wilkins

24th

poll taxes (national elections)

Felons

(current or past)

Richardson v. Ramirez Holding

Amendment XIV, Sec. 2 permits a state to ban a felon from voting, even after completing incarceration. When the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced ...

Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections, 383 U.S. 663 (1966).

Are poll taxes constitutional?: Affluence of a voter or payment of a fee is unconstitutional. Voter qualifications can have no relation to wealth. Voter restrictions that invidiously discriminate are not constitutional. Right to vote Art. I §2. - Federal elections. State elections mentioned nowhere. However, if lines are to be drawn they have to be drawn consistent with the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment. Lassiter does not apply here because the ability to read and write has a relation to the intelligent use of the ballot. Reynolds v. Sims - equal voting representation. All places and all races. States power to limit voting qualifications (which may be closely scrutinized and confined) is fixed on such a those germane to one's ability to participate intelligently. Not like a license as state argues. Wealth and property traditionally disfavored. Wealth is a capricious or irrelevant factor. Invidious discrimination. The equal protection clause is not shackled to the political theory of a particular era. Not shackled to historical notions either.

Richardson v Ramirez

Facts: Three respondents were convicted of felonies and have served sentence CA Constitution: Prohibits persons convicted of "bribery, perjury, forgery, malfeasance of office ... or other high crimes." Held: Amendment XIV, Sec. 2 permits a state to ban a felon from voting, even after completing incarceration. When the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced ...

Igartua DeLa Rosa v. U.S., 32 F. 3d 8 (1994)

Held: Despite U.S. Citizenship, Puerto Rico is not entitled to either representation in the House or Senate or a vote for President

Puerto Rico

Igartua DeLa Rosa v. U.S., 32 F. 3d 8 (1994) not a state. Citizens, but can't vote. No rep.

Adams v. Clinton, 90 F. Supp. 2d 335

Provisions of Congressional representation tied to statehood

Hunter v. Underwood

Struck down §182 of the AL constitution which disfranchised people convicted of any crime involving moral turpitude. Applied more to Blacks was the reason 1.7 times more likely to be stopped from voting. Designed that way. Discrimination was the motivating factor.

23rd Amendment

The District constituting the seat of government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct: A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a state, but in no event more than the least populous state; they shall be in addition to those appointed by the states, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a state; and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment.

23rd amendment

The District constituting the seat of government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct: A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a state, but in no event more than the least populous state; they shall be in addition to those appointed by the states, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a state; and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment.

Lassiter v. Northhampton County Board of Elections, 360 U.S. 45 (1959).

Whether a state can require a literacy test of all citizens regardless of race and be consistent with the fourteenth and 17th amendments. literacy tests fairly applied are constitutional. Suffrage is established and guaranteed by the constitution and is subject to state standards which are not discriminatory and which do not contravene any restriction that Congress acting pursuant to its constitutional powers, has imposed. The ability to read a write has some relation to promotion of the intelligent use of the ballot. Literacy is neutral with respect to race and sex. Literacy and intelligence are not synonymous, however. Illiterate voters nay be intelligent. You need to read to know issues. Not a calculated scheme as in other cases. Not improper on its face.

Richardson v. Ramirez, 418 U.S. 24 (1974)

Whether the CA constitution's and other CA laws prohibiting those convicted of felonies or infamous crimes from voting violates the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment. Rule: States may prohibit convicted felons from voting. 29 states, at the time, had constitutional provisions preventing (or authorized the legislature to prohibit) people convicted of felonies or infamous crimes from voting.

Adams v. Clinton

lawsuit dismissed of 75 residents of D.C. . Article I §2 and 23rd amendment. Provisions of Congressional representation tied to statehood. Founders intended it. Equal Protection clause only protects the rights of qualified citizens to vote. • Only presidential elections Art I §2

Kramer v. Union Free School District NO 15

limited the right to vote in certain school district elections to residents who were otherwise eligible to vote in state or federal elections if they also either (1) owner or leased taxable real property within the district, or (2) were parents or had custody of children enrolled in the local public schools. whether the property and children requirements are constitutional. Whether you could limit a school election in this case and exclude large groups in the reasoning. Rule: must consider • Facts and circumstances • State's interests • Interests of those being disadvantaged Close and exacting examination. Rational basis not the test, no presumption of constitutionality. Strict scrutiny. - Necessary to promote a compelling state interest? Maybe - Narrowly tailored? Not here. The subject of the election is irrelevant. Even though they don't have general legislating powers. Other than appellant the statute disenfranchises people who live on tax exempt property, boarders, and lodgers, parents who neither own nor lease qualifying property and whose children are too young to attend schools, parents who neither own nor lease qualifying property and whose children go to private schools. Appellant says he and others is interested and affected by the board's decisions. Quality and structure of public school may affect entire population. Property Taxes affect him because they affect the prices of goods and services. The court does not reject this interest but the interest is not being accomplished with enough precision. People are included who have at best an indirect interest and excludes who have a distinct and direct interest. Appellees offer no explanation of this that is satisfactory. They just say it is rational. To balance the interest of the community in having orderly school district with against individual voting. Rational is not the standard.

• Women

o 19th amendment, ratified August 26th 1920 "the rights of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State on account of sex." o Almost no litigation o First franchised in the west o Arguments by men and women that women voting would destroy traditional gender roles destroy family life. o Middle class women supported, upper-class opposed o 1910 suffrage worked with other movements and working class interests o WWI o Rejected by most of the south (TX approved it) o White women against blacks and immigrants argument

Holding property

o Pauper exclusions - those receiving poor relief excluded from the vote Dependence on other too easily manipulated or corrupted to vote Self-ownership

15th amendment

race

Residence Defined

registration and voting purposes means that place at which a person habitually sleeps, keeps his or her personal effects and has a regular place of lodging