Skip to main content
· 10/17/1892

McPherson v. Blacker

Citations

  • 146 U.S. 1
  • 13 S. Ct. 3
  • 36 L. Ed. 869
  • 1892 U.S. LEXIS 2171

Syllabus

<p>The validity of a state law providing for the appointment of electors of President and Vice President having been drawn in question before the highest tribunal of a State, as repugnant to the laws and Constitution of the United States, and that court having decided in favor of its validity, this court has jurisdiction to review the judgment under Rev, Stat. § 709.</p> <p>Under the second clause of Article II of the Constitution, the legislatures of the several States have exclusive power to direct the manner in which the electors of President and Vice President shall be appointed.</p> <p>Such appointment may be made by the legislatures. directly, or by popular, vote in districts, or by general ticket, as may be provided by the legislature.</p> <p>If the terms of the clause left the question of power in doubt, contemporaneous and continuous subsequent practical construction has determined the question as above stated.</p> <p>The second clause of Article II of the Constitution was not amended by the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, and they do not limit the power of appointment to the particular manner pursued at the timé of the adoption of tliese amendments, or, secure to every male inhabitant of a State, being a citizen of the United States, the right from the time of his majority to vote for presidential electors.</p> <p>A state law fixing a date for the meeting of electors, differing from that prescribed by the act of Congress, is not thereby wholly invalidated; but the date may be rejected and the law stand.</p>

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that challenge to state's electoral allocation law did not present a political question
  • holding a Michigan statute providing for the election of presidential electors by congressional district did not violate the Electors Clause
  • explaining that this clause “convey[s] the broadest power of determination” and “leaves it to the legislature exclusively to define the method” of appointing presidential electors
  • noting that the Constitution “recognizes that the people act through their representatives in the legislature, and leaves it to the legislature exclusively to define the method of effecting the object [of selecting electors]
  • noting the Constitution “leaves it to the legislature exclusively to define the method” of appointing presidential electors
  • summarizing the methods by which presidential electors were appointed by state legislatures during the first four presidential elections

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Fuller

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.