Legal Opinion

Lee v. State

Washington Supreme Court

Decided May 26, 2016No. 92708-1PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMadsen, C.J.

¶1 Appellants1 (hereinafter State or sponsors) seek reversal of a King County Superior Court order declaring Initiative 1366 (1-1366) unconstitutional. At the heart of this case lies the fact that 1-1366, if enacted, would “result! ] in either a one-time reduction in the sales tax or [the proposal of a constitutional amendment].” Corr. Opening Br. of Appellants at 27 (italics added). Based on the plain language of the initiative, we hold that 1-1366 requires the legislature to choose between two operative provisions. This does not constitute valid contingent legislation. Instead, this is the…

2Cases cited40 opinions

  1. Amalgamated Transit Union Local 587 v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Walker v. MunroWashington Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Diversified Industries Development Corp. v. RipleyWashington Supreme Court · 1973
  4. Washington Federation of State Employees v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1995
  5. To-Ro Trade Shows v. CollinsWashington Supreme Court · 2001

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Eyman v. WymanWashington Supreme Court · 2018
  2. Tim Eyman v. Robert FergusonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2019
  3. American Hotel & Lodging Association, Apps. v. City Of Seattle, Res.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2018
  4. City Of Seattle, Appellant/cr-respondent v. S. Michael Kunath, Respondent/cr-appellantCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2019
  5. Chelan Basin Conservancy v. GBI Holding Co.Washington Supreme Court · 2017

9 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