Mezvinsky v. Davis
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1DissentRoberts, Chief Justice
By arbitrarily discarding recent precedent and substituting its judgment for the considered judgment of the Legislature, the majority “bring[s] adjudications of this tribunal into the same class as a restricted railroad ticket, good for this day and this train only.” Smith v. Allwright, 321 U.S. 649, 669, 64 S.Ct. 757, 766, 88 L.Ed. 987 (1944) (Roberts, J., dissenting). I must dissent.
An enactment of the Legislature may not be declared unconstitutional “unless it clearly, palpably, and plainly violates the Constitution.” Tosto v. Pennsylvania Nursing Home Loan Agency, 460 Pa. 1, 16, 331 A.2d…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Smith v. AllwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Daly v. HemphillSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
- Tosto v. Pennsylvania Nursing Home Loan AgencySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Orloski v. DavisDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1983
- Thiemann v. AllenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979