State ex rel. Swetland v. Kinney

The issue to be decided herein is whether the definition of “preceding year” contained in Am. Sub. H. B. No. 50 conflicts with the meaning of that phrase in Section 2a, *570Article XII of the Ohio Constitution, thus rendering Am. Sub. H. B. No. 50 unconstitutional. After considering the relevant facts we conclude Am. Sub. H. B. No. 50 is instrumental in effectuating the intent of Section 2a, Article XII of the Ohio Constitution, and therefore, we deny relator’s request for a writ of mandamus.

It is a generally accepted premise that courts must interpret the Constitution broadly in order to…