less than 1 minute read

Dunn v. Blumstein - The Durational Residency Requirement, Close Constitutional Scrutiny, Further Readings

Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1963 to 1972

Appellant

Winfield C. Dunn, Governor of Tennessee

Appellee

James F. Blumstein

Appellant's Claim

That the state of Tennessee's durational residency requirement for suffrage was constitutional.

Chief Lawyer for Appellant

Robert H. Roberts

Chief Lawyer for Appellee

James F. Blumstein

Justices for the Court

Harry A. Blackmun, Warren E. Burger, William O. Douglas, Thurgood Marshall (writing for the Court), Potter Stewart, Byron R. White

Justices Dissenting

William J. Brennan, Jr. (Lewis F. Powell, Jr., and William H. Rehnquist did not participate)

Place

Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

21 March 1972

Decision

The Supreme Court ruled that Tennessee's durational residency requirement was unconstitutional.

Significance

The case added another group of people--new residents in states--to the list of groups who could not be discriminated against by states setting standards for suffrage.

Related Cases

  • Williams v. Rhodes, 393 U.S. 23 (1968).
  • Bullock v. Carter, 405 U.S. 134 (1972).
  • Kusper v. Pontikes, 414 U.S. 51 (1973).
  • Lubin v. Panish, 415 U.S. 709 (1974).
  • Munro v. Socialist Workers Party, 479 U.S. 189 (1986).
  • Tashjian v. Republican Party of Connecticut, 479 U.S. 208 (1986).

Additional topics