World Library  
Flag as Inappropriate
Email this Article

Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections

Article Id: WHEBN0002676641
Reproduction Date:

Title: Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections  
Author: World Heritage Encyclopedia
Language: English
Subject: Constitution of Mississippi, African-American Civil Rights Movement (1954–68), Fifteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, Virginia elections, United States Supreme Court decisions that overrule a prior Supreme Court decision
Collection: 1966 in United States Case Law, 1966 in Virginia, African-American Civil Rights Movement (1954–68), African-American History of Virginia, History of Voting Rights in the United States, Legal History of Virginia, United States Equal Protection Case Law, United States Supreme Court Cases, United States Supreme Court Cases of the Warren Court, United States Supreme Court Decisions That Overrule a Prior Supreme Court Decision, United States Twenty-Fourth Amendment Case Law, Virginia Elections
Publisher: World Heritage Encyclopedia

Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections

Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections
Argued January 25–26, 1966
Decided March 24, 1966
Full case name Annie E. Harper, et al. v. Virginia Board of Elections, et al.
Citations 383 U.S. 663 (more)
86 S. Ct. 1079; 16 L. Ed. 2d 169; 1966 U.S. LEXIS 2905
Prior history Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
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.
Court membership
Case opinions
Majority Douglas, joined by Warren, Clark, Brennan, White, Fortas
Dissent Black
Dissent Harlan and Stewart
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. XIV
This case overturned a previous ruling or rulings
Breedlove v. Suttles (1937)

Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections, 383 U.S. 663 (1966), was a case in which the U.S. Supreme Court found that Virginia's poll tax was unconstitutional under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. The Twenty-fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution (1964) prohibited poll taxes in federal elections; five states continued to require poll taxes for voters in state elections. By this ruling, the Supreme Court banned the use of poll taxes in state elections.


  • Background 1
  • Decision 2
  • Dissents 3
  • See also 4
  • References 5
  • External links 6


The case was filed by Virginian resident Annie E. Harper, who was unable to register without having to pay a poll tax. She brought the suit against the Virginia State Board of Elections on behalf of other poor residents and herself. Harper had previously argued the case before a U.S. district court on October 21, 1964, where it was consolidated with a similar case filed by Evelyn Thomas Butts, Butts v. Harrison, Governor of Virginia and argued under the name Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections.[1] In the initial case lawyers for Harper and Butts argued against the constitutionality of the poll tax, but on November 12 the courts dismissed the case, citing 1930s precedents established by the United States Supreme Court.[2]

Harper quickly appealed this decision to the Supreme Court, but in a separate case from Butts. Butts later appealed in a separate suit, but the two cases were argued together during late January 1966.[1]


In a 6 to 3 vote, the Court ruled in favor of Ms. Harper. The Court noted that “a state violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution whenever it makes the affluence of the voter or payment of any fee an electoral standard. Voter qualifications have no relation to wealth.”

This ruling reversed a prior decision by the Court, Breedlove v. Suttles, 302 U.S. 277 (1937), which upheld the state's ability to impose poll taxes as within its powers. There had been no relevant change in the text of the Constitution between 1937 and 1966. The 24th Amendment, adopted in 1964, outlawed the poll tax in federal elections, but did not speak to the question of state elections, which was the question involved in the Harper case. The Court membership had changed and the justices examined the issue from a different point of view.


Joined by Justice Potter Stewart, Justice John Marshall Harlan II dissented, arguing that the Court had allowed some forms of discriminatory voting qualifications without violating the equal protection clause, e.g., Lassiter v. Northampton County Board of Elections (literacy test), Breedlove v. Suttles (poll tax on men), as long as it was rational. In this case, Virginia's poll tax could be deemed rational because of state’s desire to collect revenue and the belief that people who pay to vote might have more interest in the state’s policies.[3]

Justice Hugo Black filed a separate dissent. Black based his dissent mainly on stare decisis basis. As a textualist, he also criticized the majority for expanding the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment by using what he called the old "natural law due process formula." He emphasized that new meanings can be added to the Constitution only through amendments.

See also


  1. ^ a b Tarter, Brett. "Evelyn Thomas Butts (1924–1993)". Encyclopedia Virginia. Retrieved 15 July 2015. 
  2. ^ Driver, Justin (2012). "Recognizing Race". Chicago Unbound/University of Chicago: 444. Retrieved 15 July 2015. 
  3. ^ Issacharoff, Karlan, Pildes, Samuel, Pamela, Richard (2007). The Law of Democracy. Foundation Press. p. 41.  

External links

  • The Voting Rights Act of 1965,
  • John C. Bonifaz, "Not the Rich, More Than the Poor: Poverty, Race, and Campaign Finance Reform"
This article was sourced from Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. World Heritage Encyclopedia content is assembled from numerous content providers, Open Access Publishing, and in compliance with The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR), Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Public Library of Science, The Encyclopedia of Life, Open Book Publishers (OBP), PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and, which sources content from all federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government publication portals (.gov, .mil, .edu). Funding for and content contributors is made possible from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002.
Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles.
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a registered trademark of the World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization.

Copyright © World Library Foundation. All rights reserved. eBooks from Hawaii eBook Library are sponsored by the World Library Foundation,
a 501c(4) Member's Support Non-Profit Organization, and is NOT affiliated with any governmental agency or department.