In the case of Jordan, Secretary of State of California, et al. v. Silver (1964), the U.S Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a state law that required voters to register at least 90 days before an election violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The plaintiffs argued that this requirement disproportionately affected those who had recently moved into a district or were otherwise unable to register in time for an upcoming election. However, the court ruled in favor of California's Secretary of State Frank M. Jordan and upheld the constitutionality of such laws on grounds they served legitimate state interests like preventing voter fraud and ensuring orderly elections by giving officials ample time for administrative tasks such as verifying voter eligibility and preparing accurate voting lists.

In the dissenting opinion for Jordan, Secretary of State of California, et al. v. Silver (1964), it was argued that the majority's decision to strike down a provision in California law requiring candidates for office to pledge not to discriminate on racial or religious grounds as unconstitutional infringed upon states' rights and failed to consider the broader social context. The dissenting justices believed that such a requirement did not violate any constitutional provisions but rather served an important public interest by ensuring equal opportunity and non-discrimination in political representation. They contended that this measure was necessary given historical patterns of discrimination against certain groups within society, particularly racial minorities and religious groups who have been systematically excluded from holding public office due their race or religion. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of freedom of speech under First Amendment protections; arguing instead that this provision does not infringe upon free speech but merely requires potential candidates to commit themselves publicly against discriminatory practices.