Hawke v. Smith (No. 1)
Citations
- 253 U.S. 221
- 40 S. Ct. 495
- 64 L. Ed. 871
- 1920 U.S. LEXIS 1416
- 10 A.L.R. 1504
Syllabus
<p>Under the Constitution, Art. V, a proposed amendment can be ratified by two methods only,— by the legislatures of three-fourths of the States or by conventions in three-fourths of the States, the choice of method being left to Congress. P. 226.</p> <p>The term “legislatures” as used here and elsewhere in the Constitution, means tbe deliberative, representative bodies that make the laws for the people of the respective States; the Constitution makes no provision for action upon such proposals by the people directly. P. 227.</p> <p>The function of a state legislature in ratifying- a proposed amendment to the Federal Constitution, like the function of Congress in proposing such amendments, is a federal function, derived not from the people of that State but from the Constitution. P. 230.</p> <p>The ratification of a proposed amendment to the Federal Constitution by the legislature of a State is not an act of legislation, in the proper sense of the word; it is but the expression of the assent of the State to the proposed amendment. P. 229. Davis v. Hildebrant, 241 IT. S. 565, distinguished.</p> <p>The action of the General Assembly of Ohio ratifying the proposed Eighteenth Amendment cannot be referred to the electors of the State, the provisions of the state constitution requiring such a referendum being inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States. P. 231.</p>
Judges: Day
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
91 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Baker v. CarrSupreme Court· 1962-03-26· cited 6,173×
- Coleman v. MillerSupreme Court· 1939-06-05· cited 641×
- Bush v. GoreSupreme Court· 2000-12-12· cited 553×
- U. S. Term Limits, Inc. v. ThorntonSupreme Court· 1995-05-22· cited 478×
- Smiley v. HolmSupreme Court· 1932-04-11· cited 285×
- Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Comm'nSupreme Court· 2015-06-29· cited 174×
- United States v. SpragueSupreme Court· 1931-02-24· cited 153×
- Leser v. GarnettSupreme Court· 1922-02-27· cited 139×
- In Re Initiative Petition No. 349, State Question No. 642Supreme Court of Oklahoma· 1992-08-04· cited 126×
- Newberry v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1921-05-02· cited 115×
- Donovan v. PriestSupreme Court of Arkansas· 1996-10-21· cited 99×
- Hall v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1989-02-09· cited 91×
- American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations v. EuCalifornia Supreme Court· 1984-08-27· cited 90×
- Dillon v. GlossSupreme Court· 1921-05-16· cited 75×
- State Ex Rel. Brant v. BeermannNebraska Supreme Court· 1984-06-15· cited 52×
- Moore v. HarperSupreme Court· 2023-06-27· cited 49×
- Apodaca v. ViramontesNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1949-12-07· cited 41×
- State Ex Rel. Harper v. WaltermireMontana Supreme Court· 1984-11-28· cited 38×
- Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. v. PadillaCalifornia Supreme Court· 2016-01-04· cited 38×
- City of Austin v. ThompsonTexas Supreme Court· 1949-03-23· cited 38×
Cites
2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.