Editing Hugo Black (section)

===Voting rights===
{{quote box
| quote  =  No right is more precious in a free country than that of having a voice in the election of those who make the laws under which, as good citizens, we must live. Other rights, even the most basic, are illusory if the right to vote is undermined. [[United States Constitution|Our Constitution]] leaves no room for classification of people in a way that unnecessarily abridges this right.| source =
--[[Supreme Court Justice|Justice]] Black – on [[Suffrage|the right to vote]] as the foundation of democracy in ''[[Wesberry v. Sanders]]'' (1964).<ref>{{cite web |title=''Wesberry v. Sanders'', 376 U.S. 1 (1964), at 17–18. |url=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/376/1/ |publisher=Justia US Supreme Court Center |access-date=January 5, 2021 |date=February 17, 1964 |archive-date=January 7, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210107043412/https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/376/1/ |url-status=live }}</ref>
| width  = 27%
| align  = right
| style = padding:8px;
}}

Black was one of the Supreme Court's foremost defenders of the "[[one man, one vote]]" principle.<ref>''Hugo Black''. By Roger K. Newman. Fordham University Press. p. 575.</ref> He delivered the opinion of the court in ''[[Wesberry v. Sanders]]'' (1964), holding that the Constitution required congressional districts in any state to be approximately equal in population. He concluded that the Constitution's command "that Representatives be chosen 'by the People of the several States' means that as nearly as is practicable one man's vote in a congressional election is to be worth as much as another's".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?navby=volpage&court=us&vol=376&page=20|title=FindLaw's United States Supreme Court case and opinions.|website=Findlaw|access-date=February 18, 2006|archive-date=May 2, 2006|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060502233419/http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?navby=volpage&court=us&vol=376&page=20|url-status=live}}</ref> Likewise, he voted in favor of ''[[Reynolds v. Sims]]'' (1964), which extended the same requirement to state legislative districts on the basis of the equal protection clause.{{Citation needed|date=September 2019}}

At the same time, Black did not believe that the equal protection clause made [[Poll tax (United States)|poll taxes]] unconstitutional. During his first term on the court, he participated in a unanimous decision to uphold Georgia's poll tax in the case of ''[[Breedlove v. Suttles]]''.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/302/277/case.html|title=''Breedlove v. Suttles'', 302 U.S. 277 (1937)|access-date=August 27, 2017|archive-date=August 28, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170828013130/https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/302/277/case.html|url-status=live}}</ref> Then, twenty-nine years later, he dissented from the court's ruling in ''[[Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections]]'' (1966), invalidating the use of the poll tax as a qualification to vote, in which ''Breedlove'' was overturned. He criticized the court for exceeding its "limited power to interpret the original meaning of the Equal Protection Clause" and for "giving that clause a new meaning which it believes represents a better governmental policy".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=383&invol=663|title=FindLaw's United States Supreme Court case and opinions |website=Findlaw|access-date=February 18, 2006|archive-date=January 17, 2005|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050117131218/http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=383&invol=663|url-status=live}}</ref> He also dissented from ''[[Kramer v. Union Free School District No. 15]]'' (1969), in which a majority struck down a statute that prohibited registered voters from participating in certain school district elections unless they owned or rented real property in their local school district, or were parents or guardians of children attending the public schools in the district.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/395/621/case.html|title=''Kramer v. Union Free Sch. Dist.'' No. 15, 395 U.S. 621 (1969)|access-date=August 27, 2017|archive-date=August 28, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170828011027/https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/395/621/case.html|url-status=live}}</ref>