Legal Opinion

Mannix v. Keisling

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided October 7, 1993No. SC S40542, S40543PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGraber, J.

These are original proceedings in which petitioners challenge two ballot titles certified by the Attorney General to the Secretary of State.1 Petitioners are electors who timely submitted written comments on the Attorney General’s draft ballot titles. Therefore, they are entitled to petition this court seeking different titles. ORS 250.085(2).

The first proposed ballot measure provides:

“Article I, section 8, of this Constitution shall not be interpreted to prevent the People, the Legislative Assembly, or any City or County from enacting laws regulating or prohibiting obscenity, to the extent…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Crumpton v. KeislingOregon Supreme Court · 1993

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Ascher v. KULONGOSKI (ELECTIONS DIV. 46)Oregon Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Mannix v. KulongoskiOregon Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Ascher v. KULONGOSKI (ELECTIONS DIV. 46)Oregon Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Mannix v. KulongoskiOregon Supreme Court · 1996

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API