Summary

Portrait of Potter Stewart Potter Stewart Kramer v. Union Free School District N15…

Persons who commute across a state line to work may well have a great stake in the affairs of the State in which they are employed; some college students under 21 may be both better informed and more passionately interested in political affairs than many adults. But such discrepancies are the inevitable concomitant of the line drawing that is essential to law making. So long as the classification is rationally related to a permissible legislative end, therefore-as are residence, literacy, and age requirements imposed with respect to voting there is no denial of equal protection.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Potter Stewart Potter Stewart Kramer v. Union Free School District N15…

Thus judged, the statutory classification involved here seems to me clearly to be valid. New York has made the judgment that local educational policy is best left to those persons who have certain direct and definable interests in that policy: those who are either immediately involved as parents of school children or who, as owners or lessees of taxable property are burdened with the local cost of funding school district operations.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Potter Stewart Potter Stewart Kramer v. Union Free School District N15…

Clearly a State may reasonably assume that its residents have a greater stake in the outcome of elections held within it boundaries than do other persons. Likewise, 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.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature