Legal Opinion · Dissent

Polhill v. Buckley

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided September 9, 1996No. 96SA257Published

1DissentJustice Scott

The plain language of Article XIX, section 2(3) expressly prohibits the submission to the electorate of measures that violate the single-subject requirement. That provision, which controls our deliberations here, pro*123vides: “No measure proposing an amendment or amendments to this constitution shall be submitted by the general assembly to the registered electors of the state containing more than one subject_” Art. XIX, § 2(3) (emphasis added). Despite this clear limitation on the authority of the General Assembly, the majority holds that “the Colorado Constitution [does not] confer upon the…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Romer v. EvansSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  2. Burke v. BarnesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  3. Conrad v. City & County of DenverSupreme Court of Colorado · 1982
  4. Bickel v. City of BoulderSupreme Court of Colorado · 1994
  5. Colorado General Assembly v. LammSupreme Court of Colorado · 1985

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API