Fortson v. Morris

1966-12-12

Headline: Georgia law letting the state legislature pick the governor when no candidate wins a majority is upheld, allowing legislators rather than voters to decide the 1966 gubernatorial outcome

Holding: The Court held that Georgia’s constitutional rule allowing the General Assembly to elect the Governor when no candidate wins a majority does not violate the Equal Protection Clause and reversed the lower court.

Real World Impact:

Allows legislature to choose governor when no majority is reached
Affirms long-standing state constitutional method over this federal equal-protection challenge
Could result in a candidate with fewer popular votes becoming Governor

Topics: gubernatorial elections, voting equality, state constitutional rules, legislative selection of governor

Summary

Background

A group of Georgia voters sued after the November 8, 1966, governor’s race produced no majority winner (955,770 total votes: 449,894; 448,044; 57,832). Georgia’s Constitution (in place since 1824 and readopted in 1945) provides that if no candidate wins a majority, the General Assembly chooses the governor from the two highest vote-getters. A three‑judge federal district court enjoined the Assembly from doing so, finding that the legislative selection violated the Equal Protection Clause.

Reasoning

The Supreme Court asked whether Georgia’s Article V method denies equal protection. The majority, writing that the provision has long historical use and that the Assembly’s choice is limited to the two top popular vote recipients, held that this method does not conflict with the Equal Protection Clause when applied as written. The Court said an earlier case (Gray v. Sanders) struck down Georgia’s county‑unit voting scheme but did not forbid a State from using its legislature to decide a gubernatorial contest. The Court also relied on a prior ruling that the Georgia Assembly could still lawfully function, so it is not disqualified from choosing the governor. The Supreme Court reversed the District Court’s injunction.

Real world impact

The ruling permits the Georgia General Assembly to proceed to select the governor under the state constitution when no candidate receives a majority. That practical effect may allow legislators, rather than a statewide runoff of voters, to determine the winner in such close races. The decision resolves the immediate dispute and clears the way for the legislative selection provided in Georgia’s constitution.

Dissents or concurrances

Dissenting Justices argued the Assembly method dilutes individual votes, risks a legislature choosing the popular loser, and undermines the “one person, one vote” principle; they favored a voter runoff.