375 U.S. 399 (1964), 51, Anderson v. Martin
|Docket Nº:||No. 51|
|Citation:||375 U.S. 399, 84 S.Ct. 454, 11 L.Ed.2d 430|
|Party Name:||Anderson v. Martin|
|Case Date:||January 13, 1964|
|Court:||United States Supreme Court|
Argued November 20-21, 1963
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
Appellants, residents of a Louisiana parish, are Negroes. Both sought election to the parish School Board in the 1962 Democratic Party primary election. Prior to the election, they filed this suit in federal court to enjoin the enforcement of Louisiana Revised Statutes §18:1174.1, which requires that, in all primary, general or special elections, the nomination papers and ballots shall designate the race of the candidates. A three-judge District Court upheld the constitutionality of the statute.
Held: the compulsory designation by Louisiana of the race of the candidate on the ballot operates as a discrimination against appellants, and is violative of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Federal Constitution. Pp. 402-404.
(a) The vice of the statute lies in the placing of the power of the State behind a racial classification that induces racial prejudice at the polls. P. 402.
(b) The challenged provision of the statute cannot be deemed to be reasonably designed to meet legitimate governmental interests in informing the electorate as to candidates. P. 403.
(c) The contention that the statute is nondiscriminatory because the labeling provision applies equally to Negro and white cannot be sustained. Pp. 403-404.
206 F.Supp. 700 reversed.
CLARK, J., lead opinion
MR. JUSTICE CLARK delivered the opinion of the Court.
Louisiana Revised Statutes § 18:1174.1 provides that in all primary, general or special elections, the nomination papers and ballots shall designate the race of candidates for elective office.1 The question involved in this appeal is whether this requirement violates the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment or the [84 S.Ct. 455] Fifteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. A three-judge United States District
Court, convened under 28 U.S.C. § 2284, upheld the constitutionality of the statute by a 2-to-1 vote, 206 F.Supp. 700. On direct appeal, 28 U.S.C. § 1253, we noted probable jurisdiction, 372 U.S. 904.
Appellants, residents of East Baton Rouge, Louisiana, are Negroes. Each sought election to the School Board of that parish in the 1962 Democratic Party primary election. Prior to the election, they filed this suit against the Baton Rouge, Louisiana, are Negroes. Each sought election to the School Board of that parish in the 1962 Democratic Party primary election. Prior to the Election they, filed this suit against the...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP