Legal Opinion

Green v. State Board of Canvassers

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided December 24, 1896PublishedCited by 24 opinions

Original proceeding in supreme court by writ of review. Under provisions of the constitution an amendment will' carry when it is properly submitted to the people, and a majority of those voting upon the question east their ballots in its favor, regardless of tbe number of voters voting upon other questions. {City of South Bend v. Lewis, 138 Ind. 535, 37 N. E. 986.) Judge Cooley, in his work on Constitutional Limitations, sixth edition, note 1, page 747, cites a large number…

Read the full summary

Original proceeding in supreme court by writ of review. Under provisions of the constitution an amendment will' carry when it is properly submitted to the people, and a majority of those voting upon the question east their ballots in its favor, regardless of tbe number of voters voting upon other questions. {City of South Bend v. Lewis, 138 Ind. 535, 37 N. E. 986.) Judge Cooley, in his work on Constitutional Limitations, sixth edition, note 1, page 747, cites a large number of authorities bearing upon the questions involved, and frankly says it is impossible to harmonize the cases. (Walker v.…

1Opinion of the CourtHeston, J.

The constitution of the state of Idaho eon-tains the following provisions in regard to amendments of that instrument:

“Article 20.
“Amendments.
“Section 1. Any amendment or amendments to this constitution may be proposed in either branch of the legislature,, and if the same shall be agreed to by two-thirds of all the *134members of each of the two houses, voting separately, such proposed amendment or ameiidments shall, with the yeas and nays thereon, be entered on their journals; and it shall be the duty of the legislature to submit such amendment or amendments to the electors of the state at' the…

2Cited by24 opinions

  1. Ellingham v. DyeIndiana Supreme Court · 1912
  2. State ex rel. McCue v. BlaisdellNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1909
  3. McConaughy v. Secretary of StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1909
  4. In re DennyIndiana Supreme Court · 1901
  5. In Re East Bay Etc. Water Bonds of 1925California Supreme Court · 1925

19 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