In the case of Dunn, Governor of Tennessee, et al. v. Blumstein (1971), James Blumstein challenged Tennessee's requirement that voters must have resided in the state for a year and in their county for three months before they could register to vote. The U.S Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of Blumstein, declaring these residency requirements unconstitutional as they violated both Equal Protection Clause and Due Process Clause under Fourteenth Amendment. The court held that while states can require residents to be citizens or meet age and residency criteria, such restrictions must be relevant to voter qualifications; otherwise it would result in denying some citizens their right to vote. This ruling significantly impacted voting rights across America by eliminating lengthy residency requirements.

In the dissenting opinion for Dunn v. Blumstein, Justice Black argued that states should have the right to determine their own residency requirements for voting purposes. He believed that it was not within the Court's jurisdiction to interfere with a state's decision on such matters unless there is clear evidence of discrimination or violation of constitutional rights. In this case, he did not see any proof of either and therefore disagreed with the majority ruling which struck down Tennessee’s one-year residency requirement as unconstitutional under Equal Protection Clause of Fourteenth Amendment. Furthermore, he expressed concern about potential implications on other areas where states impose similar duration-based restrictions like in-state tuition eligibility at public universities or welfare benefits distribution.