Evening star., 1944-04-09

Hugo F. Black Stanley F. Reed Felir Frankturter WI
Wiley Rutedge Monday ,uas eight to
one Justice Roberts dissenting.
Smith VS.. Allwright (1944).
MR. JUSTICE REED delivered the opinion Of the Court
This writ of certiorar brings here for review
for damages in the of 5000 part petitioner
Negro citizen Of the 48th precinct County Texas
for the refusal Of respondents election
judges respectively of that precinct to give petitioner
ballot or to permit him to cast ballot in the primary
ton OF July 27, 1940 for the nomination Of Democratic
candidates for the United Senate and House of
representatives and Governor other officers The
refusal alleged to have been solely of the race
and color Of the proposed voter.
The actions of respondents to violate Sections
81 and 43 of Title Of the United States petit
toner was deprived of rights secured by Sections
OF Article and the 14th, 18th 18th Amendments to
the United States Constitution.
The District Court denied the relief sought and the
Circuit Court of Appeals quite properly airmed its action
on the authority of Grovey Townsend 2o5 u s.
granted the petition for cerorar to resolve claimed ncon
sstency between the decision in the Grovey Of
United States vs. Classic.
Nominations by Qualified Voters
The State of Texas by It's constitution and statutes
provides that person. requirements are
met which not here in issue qualified by residence in
the district county shall qualified elector"
- Primary elections for United States Senators Con-
gressmen and State officers provided for by Chapters
IL and 1s OF the statutes Under these chapters the Dem
ocratc party required to hold the primary which was
the occasion of the alleged wrong petitioner These
nominations to be made qualified voters OF the
party.
Democratic party of Texas is held by the supreme
court of that State to be voluntary association Be vs.
HID, protected by Section 27 Of Of Rights Article l.
Constitution of Texas from interference by State except
that:
the interest of fair method and fair expression
by their members of their preferences the selection Of
their nominees the State may regulate elections by
proper laws"
The Democratic party on May a. 1882, in State con-
vention adopted the following resolution, 80:
BE it resolved that all white citizens of the State of
Texas who qualified under constitution and
laws of the State shall be eligible membership in the
Democratic party and, suc entitled participate In its
deliberations"
Resolution Basis Of Refusal.
by virtue of this resolution that the respondents
refused to permit the petitioner to vote
Texas is free to conduct elections and limit her
electorate she deem wise only al her action may
be affected by the prohibitions Of the United states Com
sttution in conflict with powers eleSated 10 and ex
ercised by the National Government Amendment
forbds State from making enforcing any law which
abrdges the privileges mmunes of citizens of the
United States and the 18th Amendment specifically inter-
diets any denial abrdgmen by the right of
citizens to vote color Respondents appeared
IN the District Court and the Circuit Court of Appeals
depended on the ground that the Democratic party
is voluntary organization with members banded together
for the of selecting individuals the group repre-
sentng the political beliefs as candidates in the
general election As such voluntary organization
claimed the Democratic party free select its own mem
bership and limit to whites participation in the partv
primary Such action the asserted does not violate
the l4th 18th and 17h Amendments officers of
ment cannot be chosen at primaries amendments
are applicable only to general elections where
officers are actually elected Primaries is said are political
party affairs, handled by party not governmental
Issue Considered by Court 1924.
The right of Negro to vote in the Texas primary has
hacn ilnrol barato
was Nixon vs. Herndon. At that time, 1924 Texas
statute declared "in shall Negro be eligible
10 participate in Democratic party primary election the
state OF Texas Nixon refused right to vote in
Democratic primary and brought suit for damages against
the election officers under the present sections 43 and
81 OF Title u S. c. respectively. 1t was urged to this
court that the denial of the Nixon violated his
constitutional rights under the 18th 18th Amendments
Without consideration of the 18TH court held that the
acnon OF Iexas in denying the ballot Negroes by
was IN violation of the equal protection of the 14h
Amendment and reversed the dismissal of the suit
The Legislature of the article but gave
the state Executive Committee of party power to
pfescroe ne quaflcatons OF its members for voting
other participation This article remains in the statutes
The State Executive Committee the Democratic partv
adopted resolution that Democrats and none other
might participate in the primaries party Nixon
was refused again the privilege of voting in primary
again brought suit for damages This court again re-
versed the dismissal suit for the reason that the
committee action deemed action and invalid
as discriminatory under the 14h Amendment test was
"'-N w
1--WE OF the State in the discharge the States authority
The question of the inherent power of political
party IN Texas without restraint any law to determine
It's own membership" left open.
Absentee Ballot Was Requested.
In Grovey VS.. Townsend this had before it an
other suit for damages for the refusal primary of
county clerk Texas officer only public functions to
perform to furnish petitioner Negro absentee ballot
The refusal was solely the ground race This case
differed from Nixon Condor, State conven-
uOn OF the Democratic the
May a. 1882 herenbefore quoted decided that the
determination by the State of the membership
OF the Democratic party made significant change from
a determination by the Executive Committee The former
was party action voluntary in character The latter as