But when, as here, that privilege is also the essential qualification for voting in a primary to select nominees for a general election, the state makes the action, of the party the action of the state. 626, while for a state to deny a vote in a general election on the ground of race or color violated the Constitution. 321 U.S. 649. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. Bell v. Hill, 123 Tex. The county executive committee may decide whether county officers are to be nominated by majority or plurality vote. 3133. A candidate must pay his share of the expenses of the election before his name is placed on the ballot. Cf. 443, at page 448, 76 L.Ed. See Love v. Wilcox, 119 Tex. [Footnote 8] However, when convinced of former error, this Court has never felt constrained to follow precedent. These compose the county executive committee. . 1347, 103 A.L.R. Get kids back-to-school ready with Expedition: Learn. The case is not mentioned in either of the opinions in the Classic case. 1178, 87 L.Ed.

1375, 127 A.L.R. The question of the inherent power of a political party in Texas 'without restraint by any law to determine its own membership' was lift open. 5, 184 S.W. 3123-3125 cover the making of returns to the county and state chairmen and canvass of the result by the county committee. This appears, however, to be a morally rather than a legally enforcible pledge.

Absentee voting machinery provided by the state for general elections is also used in primaries.

It is regrettable that, in an era marked by doubt and confusion, an era whose greatest need is steadfastness of thought and purpose, this court, which has been looked to as exhibiting consistency in adjudication and a steadiness which would hold the balance even in the face of temporary ebbs and flows of opinion, should now itself become the breeder of fresh doubt and confusion in the public mind as to the stability of our institutions. Art. 1368. The main issue discussed in this case brief is that Texas claimed the Democratic Party to be private company that could proclaim their own membership regulations. Id., 286 U. S. 84-85. 1273, overruling Haddock v. Haddock, 201 U.S. 562, 26 S.Ct. The reason for my concern is that the instant decision, overruling that announced about nine years ago, tends to bring adjudications of this tribunal into the same class as a restricted railroad ticket, good for this day and train only. 3105 with Art. 815. Nixon v. Herndon, 273 U. S. 536 (1927). 1031, 85 L.Ed. While not unmindful of the desirability of its adhering to former decisions of constitutional questions, this Court is not constrained to follow a previous decision which, upon reexamination, is believed erroneous, particularly one which involves the application of a constitutional principle, rather than an interpretation of the Constitution to evolve the principle itself. CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS. The Court reasoned that the rule restricting primary voters to whites denied Smith equal protection under the law in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. 3101. As the Louisiana statutes for holding primaries are similar to those of Texas, our ruling in Classic as to the unitary character of the electoral process calls for a reexamination as to whether or not the exclusion of Negroes from a Texas party primary was state action.

in the district or county "shall be deemed a qualified elector." Parker v. Brown, 317 U.S. 341, 359, 360, 63 S.Ct. 5, 184 S.W. 218, one who lost at the primary may still be elected at the general election by a write-in vote. We did decide, however, United States v. Classic, 313 U.S. 299, 61 S.Ct. This latter case was not mentioned in the opinion. It was decided that the determination by the state convention of the membership of the Democratic party made a significant change from a determination by the Executive Committee. 810, 85 L.Ed. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. Cf. Grovey v. Townsend, 295 U. S. 45 (1935). [Footnote 3] The suit was filed in the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of Texas, which had jurisdiction under Judicial Code § 24, subsection 14.

The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. of a political party in Texas "without restraint by any law to determine its own membership" was lift open. 673, 716, 39 L.Ed. 3124. 3091. §§ 31 and 43, in that petitoner was deprived of rights secured by Sections 2 and 4 of Article I2 and the Fourteenth, Fifteenth and Seventeenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.3 The suit was filed in the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of Texas, which had jurisdiction under Judicial Code Section 24, subsection 14, 28 U.S.C.A.

The actions of respondents are said to violate §§ 31 and 43 of Title 8 [Footnote 1] of the United States Code, 8 U.S.C. 1031, 85 L.Ed. Texas thus directs the selection of all party officers.

Cf.

Pp. No name which has not been so certified may appear upon the ballot for the general election as a candidate of a political party. 394, 67 L.Ed. The District Court denied the relief sought and the Circuit Court of Appeals quite properly affirmed its action on the authority of Grovey v. Townsend, 295 U.S. 45, 55 S.Ct. 1484. Waples v. Marrast, 108 Tex. Cf. 1200; Chambers v. Florida, 309 U.S. 227, 228, 60 S.Ct. A declaratory judgment also was sought as to the constitutionality of the denial of the ballot. 2978. 3120 authorizes the use of voting booths, ballot boxes and guard rails, prepared for the general election, 'for the organized political party nominating by primary election that cast over one hundred thousand votes at the preceding general election.'

180. In an opinion written by Justice Stanley F. Reed, the Court struck down the law. Decided April 3, 1944.

The Nixon cases were decided under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment without a determination of the status of the primary as a part of the electoral process. It appears that those views do not now commend themselves to the court. .

3105 with Art. The plan of the Texas primary follows substantially that of Louisiana, with the exception that in Louisiana the state pays the cost of the primary while Texas assesses the cost against candidates. 3139, 1939 Supp. Art. Pollock v. Farmers Loan & Trust Co., 157 U. S. 429, 157 U. S. 652. The state convention has authority to choose the state executive committee and its chairman. If so, the situation is even worse than that exhibited by the outright repudiation of an earlier decision, for it is the fact that, in the Classic case, Grovey v. Townsend was distinguished in brief and argument by the Government without suggestion that it was wrongly decided, and was relied on by the appellees, not as a controlling decision, but by way of analogy. Did denying blacks the right to vote in primary elections violate the Fifteenth Amendment? The United States District Court dismissed his action, and the Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed; but this court reversed the judgment and sustained the right of action by a vote of 5 to 4. Each precinct primary is to be conducted by a presiding judge and the assistants he names. 622, 79 L.Ed. ), Article 2955. Other precedents of this Court forbid the abridgement of the right to vote.

567; Guinn v. United States, 238 U.S. 347, 361, 35 S.Ct. 338, and Burnet v. Coronado Oil & Gas Co., 285 U.S. 393, 52 S.Ct. Without the privilege of determining the policy of a political association and its membership, the right to organize such an association would be a mere mockery. 578, 81 L.Ed. The form of the ballot is prescribed by Art. In 1927, the legislature of Texas repealed the provision condemned by this court and enacted that every political party in the State might, through its Executive Committee, prescribe the qualifications of its own members and determine in its own way who should be qualified to vote or participate in the party, except that no denial of participation could be decreed by reason of former political or other affiliation. As such a voluntary organization, it was claimed, the Democratic party is free to select its own membership and limit to whites participation in the party primary.

States must make voting in their primary elections equally accessible to voters of all races, even if they do not manage the election process themselves. In 1923 Texas adopted a statute which declared that no negro should be eligible to participate in a Democratic Primary election in that State. In reaching this conclusion, we are not unmindful of the desirability of continuity of decision in constitutional questions. 78, 80 L.Ed. 1368. the character of discrimination or abridgment should be applied to the primary as are applied to the general election. When primaries become a part of the machinery for choosing officials, state and national, as they have here, the same tests to determine the character of discrimination or abridgement should be applied to the primary as are applied to the general election. Each signer must take an oath to the effect that he did not participate in a primary at which a candidate for the office in question was nominated. 703, 108 A.L.R. A different result was reached on the theory that the Committee action was state authorized and the Convention action was unfettered by statutory control. The plan of the Texas primary follows substantially that of Louisiana, with the exception that, in. § 1979 and 2004, the present sections 43 and 31 of Title 8, U.S.C., 8 U.S.C.A. 785, 24 A.L.R. 2978.

Texas thus directs the selection of all party officers. 3101. 867, 5 Ann.Cas.

The names of nominees of a party casting more than 100,000 votes at the last preceding general election may not be printed on the ballot unless they were chosen at a primary election. P. 546. Under these chapters, the Democratic Party was required to hold the primary which was the occasion of the alleged wrong to petitioner. Consequently, there was found no ground for holding that the county clerk's refusal of a ballot because of racial ineligibility for party membership denied the petitioner any right under the Fourteenth or Fifteenth Amendments. He brought an action for damages against the clerk in a state court. Cf. This phase of the case is not considered further, as the decision on the merits determines the legality of the action of the respondents. 299, 102 A.L.R. Art. 857, 56 A.L.R. [ Footnote 6 ] The extent to which the state controls the primary election machinery appears from the Texas statutes, as … Knox, 277 U.S. 218, 48 S.Ct. 252, 80 L.Ed. ', 'Section 2. Their soundness, however, is not a matter which presently concerns me. Statutes provide for the election by the voters of precinct. Cf. 443, 448, 76 L.Ed.

The United States is a constitutional democracy. 35, Justices Roberts and McReynolds dissenting and Chief Justice Hughes concurring on other grounds; Nye v. United States, 313 U.S. 33, 61 S.Ct. This resolution influenced all other states where the party used the white primary regulation. Art. Art. Smith v. Allwright, 5 Cir., 131 F.2d 593. As appears above in the summary of the statutory provisions set out in note 6 Texas requires by the law the election of the county officers of a party.