Home › Case briefs › Constitutional Law

Lassiter v. Northampton County Board of Elections

Supreme Court of the United States · 1959 · Constitutional Law

Constitutional LawVoting RightsSuffrage QualificationsEqual ProtectionFifteenth AmendmentSeventeenth Amendmentliteracy testvoter registration

Facts

Appellant, a Negro citizen of North Carolina, applied to register to vote but refused to submit to the literacy test required by North Carolina statute, which required a prospective voter to read and write a section of the North Carolina Constitution in English. Her registration was denied by the registrar and again by the County Board of Elections on de novo review solely because of that refusal. She argued that the literacy-test requirement violated the Fourteenth, Fifteenth, and Seventeenth Amendments. The North Carolina constitutional provision containing the literacy test also included a grandfather clause, but the state courts treated the grandfather clause as separable and invalid while leaving the literacy test operative.

Issue

May a State, consistently with the Fourteenth and Seventeenth Amendments, require all voters irrespective of race or color to satisfy a literacy test? Relatedly, may North Carolina enforce its literacy test when the grandfather clause historically linked to it is treated as separable and void?

Rule

A State has broad power to determine voter qualifications, and may require a literacy test if the requirement is nondiscriminatory, facially fair, and not a device for racial discrimination or otherwise contrary to a constitutional restriction or a valid congressional enactment. A facially neutral literacy test is not unconstitutional merely because literacy and intelligence are not synonymous; it is invalid if used or structured as a scheme to facilitate forbidden discrimination.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

The State of Franklin requires every voter registration applicant to read aloud and copy by hand a short paragraph from the Franklin Constitution in English. Maya Ortiz applies to register in Dayton, Ohio, refuses to take the test, and argues that literacy has no necessary connection to political judgment, so the requirement is unconstitutional on its face.

How should a court rule on Maya's facial challenge?

Explanation. The majority held that states have broad power to set voter qualifications, subject to constitutional and congressional limits. It specifically approved a facially fair literacy requirement requiring applicants to read and write a section of the state constitution, reasoning that literacy has some relation to the state's goal of promoting intelligent use of the ballot. The fact that literacy and intelligence are not identical does not make the law facially invalid.