Kramer v. Union Free School District No. 15, 395 U.S. 621 

Supreme Court of the United States

1969

Chapter

6

Title

Implied Fundamental Rights

Page

770

Topic

Fundamental Interests and the Equal Protection Clause

Quick Notes

New York law provided that in certain school districts, residents could vote in school district elections only if they owned or leased taxable real property within the district or had children enrolled in the local public schools.

Kramer, a 31-year-old stock broker and resident of District No. 15 who lived with his parents, challenged this voting restriction on equal protection grounds.

Rule

o         It is a violation of equal protection to restrict the voting in school district elections owner or lessors of real property and to parents of enrolled children.

o         Participation in school district elections may not be limited to property owners and parents within the district.

Chief Justice Warren - States may not regulate eligibility to vote

o         Once the right to vote in an election has been granted to the public, states may not regulate eligibility for the vote in ways that are inconsistent with equal protection.

Book Name

Constitutional Law : Stone, Seidman, Sunstein, Tushnet.  ISBN:  978-0-7355-7719-0

Issue

o         Whether a State may restrict the voting in school district elections to parents and property owners?  No.

Procedure

Trial

o         United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, which dismissed appellant's complaint against appellee school district

Supreme

o         Reversed

Facts/Cases

Discussion

Key Phrases

Rules/Laws

Pl -   Kramer

Df -   Union Free School District

Description

o         New York law provided that in certain school districts, residents could vote in school district elections only if they owned or leased taxable real property within the district or had children enrolled in the local public schools.

o         Kramer, a 31-year-old stock broker and resident of District No. 15 who lived with his parents, challenged this voting restriction on equal protection grounds.

o         New York argued that it had a legitimate interest in limiting school district elections to those primarily interested in those elections, and that, at any rate, the offices being voted on could have been filled through appointment if the legislature had wished.

Chief Justice Warren

Violation of equal protection

o         It is a violation of equal protection to restrict the voting in school district elections to parents and property owners or lessors.

Strict Scrutiny Analysis

o         Restrictions on the franchise [the right to vote] must be examined with strict scrutiny to ensure that they are necessary to promote a compelling state interest.

Means chosen are no precisely tailored

o         Assuming that the asserted interest in limiting these elections to those primarily interested in them is legitimate, it is still clear that the means chosen to accomplish that goal are not precisely tailored enough to survive strict scrutiny.

Kramer pays taxes, but is excluded

o         For example, people such as Kramer, who pay taxes in the district and have an interest in the local schools, are excluded from the district's elections, while people who simply rent property in the district and may not be at all affected by the district's decisions are allowed to vote.

Irrelevant

o         The fact that school district elections were not required at all and the offices could have been filled through appointments is irrelevant.

States may not regulate eligibility to vote

o         Once the right to vote in an election has been granted to the public, states may not regulate eligibility for the vote in ways that are inconsistent with equal protection.

Reversed.

Dissent - Justice Stewart

o         It is entirely rational for a state legislature to suppose that residents, being generally better informed regarding state affairs than are nonresidents, will be more likely than nonresidents to vote responsibly.

Rules

Rule

o         It is a violation of equal protection to restrict the voting in school district elections owner or lessors of real property and to parents of enrolled children.

o         Participation in school district elections may not be limited to property owners and parents within the district.

Class Notes