How the right to vote grew: the voting amendments and the Voting Rights Act

Grade 12 Social Studies Worksheet

Circle the best answer.

1. Read this first

   Use this

   Cards A to E on tests and primaries after the Fifteenth Amendment (the excerpts are exact; card D adds figures reported in Shelby County v. Holder; card E is made up). Card A, "The Fifteenth Amendment (1870)". Who made it: Congress proposed it, and the states ratified it on February 3, 1870. For whom: the states and the people. Why: to protect the vote from denial because of race. Section 1: "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" Section 2: "The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation." Card B, "Guinn v. United States (1915)". Who made it: Chief Justice Edward White, for a unanimous Supreme Court. When: June 21, 1915. For whom: the parties, Oklahoma, other states and other courts. Why: to decide whether Oklahoma's reading test, which exempted people whose ancestors could vote in 1866, was valid. Excerpt 1 (the Oklahoma rule): "But no person who was, on January 1st, 1866, or at any time prior thereto, entitled to vote under any form of government, or who at that time resided in some foreign nation, and no lineal descendant of such person, shall be denied that right to register and vote because of his inability to so read and write sections of such Constitution." Excerpt 2 (White): "It is true it contains no express words of an exclusion from the standard which it establishes of any person on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude … but the standard itself inherently brings that result into existence since it is based purely upon a period of time before the enactment of the 15th Amendment, and makes that period the controlling and dominant test of the right of suffrage." Card C, "Smith v. Allwright (1944)". Who made it: Justice Stanley Reed, for a Supreme Court that voted 8 to 1; Justice Owen Roberts dissented. When: April 3, 1944. For whom: the parties, Texas, other states and other courts. Why: to decide whether the Texas Democratic Party could keep Black voters out of its primary. Excerpt 1: "Whether paid directly by the state or through state requirements, it is state action which compels." Excerpt 2: "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." Card D, "South Carolina v. Katzenbach (1966) and the figures behind the Voting Rights Act". Who made it: Chief Justice Earl Warren, for the Supreme Court; the figures are reported by Chief Justice John Roberts in Shelby County v. Holder (2013). When: March 7, 1966. For whom: the parties, Congress, the states and other courts. Why: to decide whether Congress could enact the Voting Rights Act of 1965 under the Fifteenth Amendment. Excerpt 1 (Warren): "Congress had found that case-by-case litigation was inadequate to combat widespread and persistent discrimination in voting, because of the inordinate amount of time and energy required to overcome the obstructionist tactics invariably encountered in these lawsuits." Excerpt 2 (Warren): "Congress may use any rational means to effectuate the constitutional prohibition of racial discrimination in voting." Excerpt 3 (Roberts, describing Katzenbach): "Case-by-case litigation had proved inadequate to prevent such racial discrimination in voting, in part because States 'merely switched to discriminatory devices not covered by the federal decrees,' 'enacted difficult new tests,' or simply 'defied and evaded court orders.'" Excerpt 4 (Roberts): "Shortly before enactment of the Voting Rights Act, only 19.4 percent of African-Americans of voting age were registered to vote in Alabama, only 31.8 percent in Louisiana, and only 6.4 percent in Mississippi." Card E, "Three made-up cases". Who made it: written for this sheet. Summary in our words, not a quotation: Case 1: State R exempts from its reading test any person whose father or grandfather was registered to vote on or before June 1, 1872, two years after the Fifteenth Amendment. In 1872 about 30 percent of adult Black men and 90 percent of adult white men were registered there. Case 2: In County M, every applicant takes the same written test, and the registrar alone decides who passes. In a year, 480 of 500 white applicants and 30 of 400 Black applicants pass. Case 3: State T prints the primary ballots, pays for counting them and sets the date. A party rule says only members "approved by the executive committee" may vote in its primary, and the committee has approved only white voters.

2. 1.

   Case 1 on card E exempts people whose ancestors were registered by June 1, 1872. Kira compares cards A and B. Which reasoning is strongest?

   • Guinn is irrelevant: the exemption names no race and its 1872 date comes after the 15th, so card A is not touched
   • Guinn fits in part: its date fell before the 15th, but this rule still carries an old gap forward, so effects matter
   • The rule stands until Congress acts, since a statute under Section 2 is the way to reach an exemption naming no race
   • Guinn governs fully: an exemption tied to an ancestor's registration is invalid whatever its date, with no proof needed
3. 2.

   Case 3 on card E has a party rule limiting its primary to members its committee approves. Luz applies card C. Which reasoning is strongest?

   • Smith bans white primaries by name, so a rule that names no race falls outside the ruling and the primary stands
   • Smith reaches it: where a primary is part of the state's machinery for choosing officials, general-election tests apply
   • The party is a private group, so its own membership rule is not state action, and the 15th Amendment does not reach the rule itself
   • Smith makes party rules on membership invalid, so a party may no longer set any limit on who votes in its primary
4. 3.

   A student claims literacy tests alone explain the low Black registration on card D. Noah tests the claim against cards B to D. What is the best verdict?

   • Supported: Guinn is about a literacy test, and the registration figures come from States that used that kind of test
   • Unsupported: registration figures say nothing about causes, so no claim about tests can be weighed against them
   • Weakly supported: low registration is shown, but Katzenbach says States also switched devices and evaded court orders
   • Shown for Mississippi, where 6.4 percent registered, the lowest rate on the card, so tests explain the gap there

5. Use this

   Cards A to E on poll taxes (the excerpts are exact; card D is partly in our words from a reference summary; card E is made up). Card A, "The Twenty-fourth Amendment (1964)". Who made it: Congress proposed it, and the states ratified it on January 23, 1964. For whom: the states and the people. Why: to end poll taxes as a condition of voting in federal elections. Section 1: "The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax." Section 2: "The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation." Card B, "Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections (1966)". Who made it: Justice William O. Douglas, for a Supreme Court that voted 6 to 3; Justices Black, Harlan and Stewart dissented. When: March 24, 1966. For whom: the parties, Virginia, other states and other courts. Why: to decide whether Virginia's $1.50 yearly poll tax for state elections was valid. Excerpt 1 (Douglas): "Lines drawn on the basis of wealth or property, like those of race … are traditionally disfavored." Excerpt 2 (Douglas): "a State violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment whenever it makes the affluence of the voter or payment of any fee an electoral standard." Excerpt 3 (Douglas): "Notions of what constitutes equal treatment for purposes of the Equal Protection Clause do change." Excerpt 4 (Black, dissenting): "The Court, however, overrules Breedlove in part, but its opinion reveals that it does so not by using its limited power to interpret the original meaning of the Equal Protection Clause, but by giving that clause a new meaning which it believes represents a better governmental policy." Card C, "Breedlove v. Suttles (1937)". Who made it: the Supreme Court, unanimously. When: December 6, 1937. For whom: Georgia, other states and other courts. Why: to decide whether Georgia could make payment of a poll tax a condition of voting in state elections. Summary in our words, not a quotation: the Court upheld the tax. Justice Black, who joined that ruling, describes it in his Harper dissent: "we unanimously upheld the right of the State of Georgia to make payment of its state poll tax a prerequisite to voting in state elections." Card D, "Poll taxes in 1964 and 1966". Who made it: a reference summary of the Twenty-fourth Amendment (Wikipedia, read Nov 14, 2026) and Justice John Harlan's Harper dissent. Summary in our words: when the amendment was ratified in 1964, five states still had a poll tax: Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Texas and Virginia. Excerpt (Harlan, dissenting): "The final demise of state poll taxes, already totally proscribed by the Twenty-Fourth Amendment with respect to federal elections and abolished by the States themselves in all but four States with respect to state elections, is perhaps in itself not of great moment." Card E, "Three made-up cases". Who made it: written for this sheet. Summary in our words, not a quotation: Case 1: In 1965, State V charges a $1.50 poll tax to vote in its elections for governor, with no federal office on the ballot. Case 2: In 1965, State V charges the same $1.50 to vote in the general election for U.S. Senator. Case 3: In 1967, State W charges $2 a year to register for any election. The law calls it a registration fee, not a tax.

6. 4.

   Case 1 on card E is a 1965 poll tax for a state-only election. Tala compares cards A to C. Which statement fits the law of 1965?

   • Neither the 24th nor Harper reaches it yet: the amendment covers federal elections only, and Harper came in 1966
   • Breedlove still bars it: that 1937 ruling held that States may not make payment of a tax a condition of voting
   • The 24th reaches it: the amendment bars denying the vote for failure to pay any poll tax, and this is a poll tax
   • Harper reaches it: its reasoning that wealth is no electoral standard applies to any election, so a 1965 court must follow it
7. 5.

   A student claims the 24th Amendment ended poll taxes in all five states that still had them in 1964. Ren tests the claim against cards A and D. What is the best verdict?

   • Shown: Harlan says the 24th totally proscribed poll taxes, so the five States could not collect one after 1964
   • Shown: Harlan says the States themselves ended the tax except in four, so the amendment ended the rest of them
   • Unsupported: card D names five States but gives no count of voters, so the claim cannot be tested against the card
   • Not shown: the amendment covered federal elections, and four states still taxed state voters until Harper in 1966
8. 6.

   Zee compares excerpts 3 and 4 on card B. Which statement about the Douglas-Black disagreement is best supported?

   • They disagree on whether the clause's meaning can change without an amendment: Black says no, Douglas says it can
   • They disagree on poll taxes themselves: Black would keep the tax as sound policy, and Douglas would end it as unwise
   • Black's dissent settles it, since he sat on the Court in 1937 and joined Breedlove, so his reading is the Court's
   • Both treat the clause's meaning as fixed, and they differ on whether Virginia's $1.50 yearly tax is too large to be fair
9. 7.

   Case 3 on card E is a $2 registration fee for every election, called a fee and not a tax. Ari compares cards A and B. Which reasoning is strongest?

   • The fee stands because Breedlove allowed States to charge for voting, and Harper left Breedlove untouched on that point
   • Harper's 'any fee' reaches it, though the 24th names only a poll tax or other tax, so a fee for any election falls
   • The 24th reaches it in state elections too, since its ban on any poll tax or other tax is written to cover every election
   • The fee stands: the 24th bars only a poll tax or other tax, and Harper dealt with a tax, so a fee is outside both

10. Use this

    Cards A to E on sex and age (the excerpts are exact; card D is in our words from a reference summary; card E is made up). Card A, "The Nineteenth Amendment (1920)". Who made it: Congress proposed it, and the states ratified it in 1920. For whom: the states and the people. Why: to protect the vote from denial because of sex. Section 1: "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 sex." Card B, "The Twenty-sixth Amendment (1971)". Who made it: Congress proposed it on March 23, 1971, and the states ratified it by July 1, 1971. For whom: the states and the people. Why: to set a national floor for the voting age. Section 1: "The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age." Card C, "Oregon v. Mitchell (1970)". Who made it: Justice Hugo Black, announcing the judgments of a Supreme Court that split 5 to 4 on each of two questions. When: December 21, 1970. For whom: the parties, Congress, the states and other courts. Why: to decide whether Congress, in the Voting Rights Act Amendments of 1970, could lower the voting age to 18. Excerpt 1 (Black): "For reasons expressed in separate opinions, my Brothers DOUGLAS, BRENNAN, WHITE, and MARSHALL join me in concluding that Congress can enfranchise 18-year-old citizens in national elections, but dissent from the judgment that Congress cannot extend the franchise to 18-year-old citizens in state and local elections." Excerpt 2 (Black): "For reasons expressed in separate opinions, my Brothers THE CHIEF JUSTICE, HARLAN, STEWART, and BLACKMUN join me in concluding that Congress cannot interfere with the age for voters set by the States for state and local elections. They, however, dissent from the judgment that Congress can control voter qualifications in federal elections." Excerpt 3 (Black): "In summary, it is the judgment of the Court that the 18-year-old vote provisions of the Voting Rights Act Amendments of 1970 are constitutional and enforceable insofar as they pertain to federal elections and unconstitutional and unenforceable insofar as they pertain to state and local elections." Card D, "The road to the Twenty-sixth Amendment". Who made it: a reference summary (Wikipedia, read Nov 14, 2026). Summary in our words: the push to lower the voting age from 21 to 18 grew across the country in the 1960s and was driven in part by the military draft during the Vietnam War. At the time of Oregon v. Mitchell, four states had a minimum voting age below 21: Georgia, Kentucky, Alaska and Hawaii. The amendment took 100 days to ratify, the fastest in American history. Card E, "Three made-up cases". Who made it: written for this sheet. Summary in our words, not a quotation: Case 1: State P registers men at any time at their town halls, but registers women only on Tuesdays at the county seat, which is more than 80 miles from some towns. Women who reach the county seat register without trouble. Case 2: In 1972, State L sets the voting age at 21 for school board elections only. Case 3: A writer says the Vietnam draft alone explains why the Twenty-sixth Amendment was ratified in 100 days.

11. 8.

    Pia reads card C. Which claim about the result of Oregon v. Mitchell do the excerpts support best?

    • Five justices approved 18 for state and local elections and four for federal ones, so the States kept control
    • Black led the Court against Congress, since five justices rejected lowering the voting age to 18 in any election
    • One majority of five settled the age at 18 for the whole country, and the same four justices dissented throughout
    • Black joined four justices to uphold 18 for federal elections and four others to bar it for state and local ones
12. 9.

    Case 3 on card E says the draft alone explains the 100-day ratification. Esme tests the claim against cards C and D. What is the best verdict?

    • Supported: card D names the draft as a driver, and nothing else on the cards points to another cause of the speed
    • Overstated: the draft is one driver, and the Court's split left federal and state ages different 92 days before the proposal
    • Shown: four states already allowed voters under 21, so States had accepted 18 before Congress acted on the question
    • Unsupported: the ruling came first, so it could not have mattered to an amendment proposed three months later
13. 10.

    Case 1 on card E burdens women's registration, but women who reach the county seat register. Jun applies card A. Which reasoning is strongest?

    • Covered once turnout falls, since a burden must be shown by results before the 19th applies to a registration rule
    • Not covered: the 19th protects the vote itself, and registration is a separate step that comes before voting begins
    • Covered: 'abridged' reaches a burden on one sex's registration, even though women who reach the county seat can register
    • Not covered: women are not denied the vote, and the 19th bars a flat refusal to register them, which did not occur here