Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Keefe v. Eyrich

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided January 31, 1986No. 85-1680PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Per curiam

This case presents a question of great significance to constitutional government in Ohio. We are called upon to decide whether a section of Ohio’s Modern Courts Amendment, passed by the voters in *1651968, can stand under a federal constitutional challenge. For reasons to follow, we conclude that it can.

At the outset, we must decide what standard is appropriate for our review of the constitutional issue now before us. We begin by noting that there is no fundamental right to run for public office. This concept was explained by the United States Supreme Court in Snowden v. Hughes (1944), 321…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Massachusetts Board of Retirement v. MurgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Snowden v. HughesSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
  3. Vance v. BradleySupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  4. State ex rel. Westchester Estates, Inc. v. BaconOhio Supreme Court · 1980

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Painter v. GraleyOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  2. State v. FoxOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Sabey v. Howard Johnson & Co.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2000
  4. State ex rel. Vana v. Maple Heights City CouncilOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Driscoll v. CorbettSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2013

24 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