In the case of McDonald et al. v. Board of Election Commissioners of Chicago et al., 1968, a group of inmates in an Illinois jail who had not been convicted sought to vote by absentee ballot in an upcoming election. The plaintiffs argued that their inability to leave jail to vote was effectively a denial of their right to vote under the Equal Protection Clause and Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. However, the Supreme Court ruled against them, stating that there was no constitutional requirement for states to provide absentee ballots for those unable or unwilling to present themselves at polling places on election day unless they fall into specific categories defined by state law (such as being physically incapacitated or serving in military service). The court also noted that it would be impractical and potentially disruptive for officials from boards of elections across various jurisdictions within a state like Illinois with its many counties and cities each having separate voting districts, precincts etc., which could lead towards administrative chaos if such requests were granted without any limitations.

In the dissenting opinion for McDonald et al. v. Board of Election Commissioners of Chicago et al., Justice William O. Douglas argued that the majority's decision was a departure from previous rulings which had established voting as a fundamental right under the Fourteenth Amendment, and therefore subject to strict scrutiny when infringed upon by state action. He contended that Illinois' absentee ballot law, which excluded pretrial detainees awaiting trial on non-bailable offenses, constituted such an infringement because it denied these individuals their right to vote without sufficient justification or compelling state interest. Furthermore, he criticized the majority for deferring too much to legislative judgment in this case rather than fulfilling its judicial duty to protect constitutional rights against unjustified encroachment by states.