Legal Opinion
Brizill v. District of Columbia Board of Elections & Ethics
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided November 22, 2006No. 06-CV-686PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FISHER, Associate Judge:
Appellants Brizill, Jones, and Muhammad sued the District of Columbia Board of Elections and Ethics (the “Board”) in the Superior Court, asserting that the Video Lottery Terminal Gambling Initiative of 2006 is not a proper subject of initiative. Concluding that approval of the VLT Gambling Initiative would exceed the legislative powers granted to the District and its citizens by the Home Rule Act, we agree with appellants.
I. The Procedural Background
On April 10, 2006, intervenor Barry Jer-rels presented to the Board a proposed initiative to allow video lottery…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Morton v. MancariSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Palmore v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Peoples Drug Stores, Inc. v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1983
- United States Parole Commission v. NobleDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1997
- Speyer v. BarryDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1991
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Jackson v. District of Columbia Board of Elections & EthicsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2010
- Catawba Indian Nation v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2014
- Dc Association of Chartered Public Schools v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2015
- Jackson v. District of Columbia Board of Elections & EthicsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2010
- Price v. District of Columbia Board of Ethics and Government AccountabilityDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2019
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.