Legal Document

395 U.S. 621 89 Supreme Court Reporter 1886 23 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 583 Morris or Haw. Hawai‘i KFH45 A2 KRAMER, Appellant,v.UNION FREE SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 15 et al. Number 258. Argued Jan. 16, 1969. Decided June Osmond K. Fraenkel, New York City, for appellant. John Pacific KF135 P2 Jehu, Albany, N.Y., appellees. Mr. Chief Justice WARREN delivered the opinion of Court. 1 In this case we are called on to determine whether § 2012 Education Law, McKinney's Consol.Laws, chapter is constitutional. The legislation provides that in certain school districts residents who otherwise eligible vote state and federal elections may district election only if they (1) own (or lease) taxable real property within district, (2) parents have custody of) children enrolled local public schools. Appellant, a bachelor neither owns nor leases property, filed suit court claiming denied him equal protection laws violation Fourteenth Amendment. With one judge dissenting, three-judge District dismissed appellant's complaint. Finding does violate Equal Protection Clause Amendment, reverse. I. 2 law basically three methods board selection. some large city districts, appointed by mayor council. N.Y.Educ.Law §§ 2553, subds. 2, 4 (1953), as amended (Supp.1968). On other hand, cities, primarily those with less than 125,000 residents, elected at general municipal which all qualified voters participate. 2502, subd. 3 (1953). Cf. 2531 Finally, such involved case, rural suburban, an annual meeting voters.1 challenged statute applicable hold meetings. To be meeting, qualified2 resident must either owner lessee located spouse qualifying (3) parent guardian child specified time during preceding year school. Although State Department has substantial responsibility education State, maintain significant control over administration affairs.3 Generally, basic operation, including prescribing courses study, determining textbooks used, even altering equipping former schoolhouse use library. 1709 Additionally, selecting members meetings, also pass directly matters. For example, approve budget submitted board. 2021, 2022 (1953).4 Moreover, once approved, governing body villages raise money been declared 'necessary teachers' salaries ordinary contingent expenses (of schools).' 1717 (1953).5 'authorize acts taxes shall deem expedient * library any (and) purchase land buildings agricultural, athletic, playground social center purposes *.' 416 5 Appellant 31-year-old college-educated stockbroker lives his parents' home Union Free School 15, applies. He citizen voted since 1959. However, he no attempts register unsuccessful. After rejected 1965 application, appellant instituted present class action challenging constitutionality voter eligibility requirements. 6 Eastern request (made pursuant 28 Code KF62 2281) convened, granted appellees' motion dismiss Kramer versus 259 F.Supp. 164 (D.C.E.D.N.Y.1966). appeal, Appeals Second Circuit reversed, ruling appelln t's complaint warranted convening court. 379 Federal Reporter, 2nd 491 (C.A.2d Cir. 1967). remand, ruled constitutional 282 70. Pursuant 1253, direct appeal Court; noted probable jurisdiction. 393 818, 117, 21 90 (1968). II. 7 At outset, it important note what not issue case. requirements citizens States, bona fide least years age challenged. agrees power impose reasonable citizenship, age, residency availability ballot. Carrington Rash, 380 89, 91, 85 775, 777, 13 675 (1965); Pope Williams, 193 621, 24 573, 48 L.Ed. 817 (1904). sole additional 2012—requirements prohibit citizenship from participating meetings elections—violate Amendment's command deny persons laws. 8 'In violates Clause, consider facts circumstances behind law, interests claims protecting, disadvantaged classification.' Williams Rhodes, 23, 30, 5, 10, And, give close exacting examination. '(S)ince right exercise franchise free unimpaired manner preservative civil political rights, alleged infringement carefully meticulously scrutinized.' Reynolds Sims, 377 533, 562, 84 1362, 1381, 12 506 (1964). See supra, 31, 10; Wesberry Sanders, 376 1, 17, 526, 535, 11 481 This careful examination necessary because statutes distributing constitute foundation our representative society. Any unjustified discrimination participate affairs selection officials undermines legitimacy government. 9 Thus, apportionment statutes, dilute effectiveness citizens' votes, receive scrutiny supra. Avery Midland County, 390 474, 88 1114, 20 45 No rigid denying residence age.6 Statutes granting selective basis always pose danger effective voice governmental substantially affect their lives.7 Therefore, grants requisite denies others, exclusions promote compelling interest. U.S., 96, S.Ct., 780. 10 these reasons, deference usually given judgment legislators extend decisions concerning officials. Those scrutinized each has, far possible, selections. Accordingly, when reviewing vote, presumption afforded traditional approval classifications can conceive 'rational basis' distinctions made8 applicable. Harper Virginia Bd. Elections, 383 663, 670, 86 1079, 1083, 16 169 (1966). 'rational' types enactments9 based assumption institutions government structured so represent fairly people. challenge effect assumption, longer serve presuming constitutionality. under attack legislature decides various levels choice elected. Legislation delegates decision making bodies portion cause unfair representation. Such exclude minority just effectively were made had selecting.10 need judicial undiminished simply because, different statutory scheme, offices subject might filled through appointment.11 do latitude whethe selected chosen appointment questions voters. fact, held where county administrative, legislative, body, its Sailors Kent County Education, 387 105, 108, 87 1549, 1552, 18 650 (1967). 'once electorate, lines drawn inconsistent Amendment.' 665, 1080.12 Nor affected 'general' legislative powers. Our necessitated election; rather, required permitted not. charter well provide council appoint would broad administrative Assuming consistent commands delegation call Court's review. office entitled there presented situation calling III. Besides others similarly live homes, disenfranchises following (unless guardians school): senior living relatives; clergy, military personnel, tax-exempt property; boarders lodgers; lease whose too young attend school; private 14 asserts excluding participation contends interested significantly decisions. All community interest quality structure education, says, urges 'the taken boards grave consequences entire population.' argues level taxation affects him, though tax price goods services community. We turn therefore question exclusion First appellees13 argue legitimate limiting 'members interest'—those 'primarily elections.' Second, appellees urge reasonably permissibly conclude 'property taxpayers' (including lessees h o share burden rent payments) district's schools interested' affairs. understand attempting limit 'subjectively concerned' about Rather, appear State's restricting matters 'directly affected' apparently reasons financed part taxes, out-of-pocket 'directly' changes should allowed vote. Similarly, thought 'direct' stake 17 Appellees ever increasing complexity many interacting phases system make extremely difficult electorate fully whys wherefores detailed operations system.' say communications administrations sent pupils 'not broadcast public'; thus, nonparents will informed parents. Further, argue, assessed (either indirectly rent) enough 'through pocketbooks, acquire information need.' express affected.' Of course, reach particular type limited. For, assuming, arguendo, legitimately affairs,' demonstrates accomplish purpose sufficient precision justify franchise. Whether allegedly excluded depends, inter alia, fact includes. words, tailored achieve articulated goal.14 Section meet standard require selectively distribute permit inclusion have, best, remote indirect interest, and, distinct decisions.15 19 offer justification seemingly infore d residents—other include 'whom could understandably most intimately actions board,' task balancing maintenance orderly against individual voting clearly remain Legislature.'16 But judgments rational. A more obtains. sufficiently further class. denial reversed. remanded proceedings opinion. It ordered. APPENDIX TO OPINION OF THE COURT. 2012, Law: 22 'A person officers, upon brought before is: 1. States. '2. Twenty-one age. '3. period thirty days next offers vote; addition thereto possesses qualifications: 25 'a. Owns owner, leases, hires, possession contract hires of, liable purposes, but occupation lodger boarder entitle 26 'b. Is provided attended eight weeks 27 'c. Not being parent, permanently residing meeting. 'No deemed ineligible reason sex, qualifications section.' 29 STEWART, whom BLACK, HARLAN join, dissenting. 30 Lassiter Northampton Election Bd., 360 45, 79 985, 1072 upheld literacy requirement, elections, imposed North Carolina. Writing unanimous Court, Douglas said: 31 'The long powers conditions suffrage exercised, 576, 817; Mason Missouri, 179 328, 335, 125, 128, 214, absent course Constitution condemns.' 50—51, 989. 32 Believing victim 'discrimination condemns,' & N Dec. Immigration Nationality Decisions affirm 33 us briefly summarized. areas authority reside 'Union Districts,' here. areas, i strict annually elect Board fiscal policy system: adopt decide amount District. funds operation system, method itself revenue taxes.1 34 Three classes elections: attending District; District, spouses; spouses.2 appellant, falls none classes, consequently disqualified despite meets law. whether, virtue disqualification 35 times variously phrased, test statute's validity familiar one: classification invalid 'if rest(s) grounds wholly irrelevant achievement regulation's objectives.' Kotch River Port Pilot Comm'rs, 330 552, 556, 67 910, 912, 91 1093.3 was requirement upheld. premise constitutionally 'designed intelligent ballot.' 51, 990. similar underlies proposition, consistently endorsed Court,4 nonresidents elections. requirements, designed help ensure outcome opportunity become candidates issues upon, entirely permissible exercises authority. Indeed, explicitly concedes, must, relating residence, literacy, Yet argues—and accepts argument—that here somehow status. am unable see distinction. 36 Clearly assume greater boundaries persons. Likewise, rational suppose generally better regarding nonresidents, likely responsibly. And same said assumptions electoral competence adults literate minors illiterates other. clear, thus infallibly perform intended function. Just '(i) lliterate people voters,'5 instances interested, informed, participants process. Persons commute across line work great employed; college students both passionately adults. discrepancies inevitable concomitant drawing essential making. So rationally related end, therefore—as respect protection. 37 Thus judged, seems me valid. educational best left definable policy: immediately who, owners burdened cost funding operations.6 True, outside genuinely conduct business—just commuters Jersey City election. unless claim monopoly wisdom sound systems 50 way conclusion purpose. 'There group management taxpayers support them them.' Doremus Educ., 342 429, 435, 72 394, 398, 96 475 (Douglas, J., dissenting). 38 good reason, really contrary. Instead, strikes down York's asserting inapt considerably stricter standard—under franchise' subjected 'exacting scrutiny'—should applied. asserted applying cannot withstand analysis. 39 quite explicit explaining why believes 'close scrutiny': 40 enactments constitutionality.' (Footnote omitted.) 41 loss how reasoning relevant promulgated, Legislatr e, able representatives body. There whatever 'structured people,' 42 jurisdiction imposing 'exacting' test. involve racial classifications, light genesis Amendment traditionally viewed inherently 'suspect.'7 impinges protected right, justified 'compelling' interest.8 confer Minor Happersett, Wall. 162, 178, 627. 43 event, standard, short doctrinaire insistence universal mandated Constitution, rejected. all, emphasized undifferentiated references terms franchise'—that dealing here, election, limited, special-purpose election.9 state, local, determined. able, therefore, processes changed, financial assistance locked into self-perpetuating status process.10 44 Secondly, limited purported rights hypothetical childless clergymen preschool children, property. merely says If requires decision-making role governance affairs, then seeks it. suggested, persuasive distinguishing between factors literacy.11 Today's irreconcilable established principle '(t)he exercised Since think sound, respectfully dissent takes place Wednesday 2013 (Supp. 1968). doe 2012. infra, 625. set out Appendix, infra. 'But while formulation policies centralized immediate extent vested localities. thousands possess high degree education. They trustees officials, sites, employ teachers discipline Graves, Development Law York, Consolidated Laws (Education Law) xxiii (McKinney 1953). R. Pyle, Some Aspects 9—13 voters, assess expenditures. appointed, submit requests government, much department. raised 'tax, levied (the) village 'corporate authorities withhold sums presents faced McDonald Comm'rs Chicago, 394 802, 1404, 739 (1969). involves absolute McDonald, casting ballot easier come polls. As noted, evidence absolutely prohibited anyone exercising franchise; ws claimed absentee Id., 807—808, 1408. citizen's determined relationship votes. mayor, change board's membership votes mayor. 1969). Each resident's formal influence perhaps indirect, residents. positions electors precluded voting, compared franchised precisely regard size n. 4, See, e.g., McGowan Maryland, 366 420, 425—428, 81 1101, 1104—1106, (1961); Allied Stores Ohio, Incorporated Bowers, 358 522, 527, 437, 441, 480, (1959); 556 (1947). suspect, race, scrutiny, regardless matter legislation. McLaughlin Florida, 184, 192, 283, 288, 222 (1964); Takahashi Fish Game Comm'n, 334 410, 68 1138, 1143, 92 1478 (1948); Oyama California, 332 633, 640, 269, 272, 249 (1948). structuring units 481, 6, 1118, showing disenfranchising scheduled (1967), delegate biennial selected. did election.' 111, 1553. pointed boards, appointments, elected, 'no (was) respecting Ibid. member named defendants. Attorney General intervened appellee. promoted constitutes resides pays decisions; however, uninterested unemployed man rents apartment oral argument, very small proportion statement reiterated appellees, proposition conceded 416, 1717, 2021; N.Y.Real.Prop.Tax Consol. Laws, 50—A, 1302, 1306, 1308. met. 425—426, 1105, 393: safeguard offended rests objective. legislatures presumed acted that, practice, result inequality. aside conceived it.' 990, 1072; 93—94, 778—779, 675; 666, 1081, 169. 52, Presumably rationale spouses process passed lessee. Korematsu 323 216, 65 193, 194; 222. Shapiro Thompson, 618, 634, 1322, 1331, 600; cf. NAACP Alabama, 357 449, 463, 78 1163, 1172. Special-purpose water, lighting, sewer exist sections country, undoubtedly partake agency's expenses. is, me, unquestionable. true, argues, pervasive authorities, agree difference anything approaching distinction dimension. Compare Lucas Forty-fourth Assembly, 713, 1459, 632; 506. 169, dealt comparison Yok instance, presumably attempt weigh reasonableness connection speculative analysis attainable; adjudication tolerant one. assuming attempted, my view requirement. ability intelligently illiterates. illiterate

Classification Label: 1