Joined by Justice Potter Stewart, Justice John Marshall Harlan II dissented, arguing that the Court had allowed some forms of discriminatory voting qualifications without violating the equal protection clause, "e.g.", "Lassiter v. Northampton County Board of Elections" (literacy test), "Breedlove v. Suttles" (poll tax on men), as long as it was rational. In this case, Virginia's poll tax could be deemed rational because of the state's desire to collect revenue and the belief that people who pay to vote might have more interest in the state's policies.