Legal Opinion
City of Tucson v. State
Arizona Supreme Court
Decided April 6, 2012No. CV-11-0150-PRPublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BALES, Justice.
¶ 1 Since statehood, Arizona’s Constitution has included a “home rule” provision authorizing eligible cities to adopt charters. Ariz. Const, art. 13, § 2. A charter city has the power to frame its own organic law, including the power to determine “who shall be its governing officers and how they shall be selected.” Strode v. Sullivan, 72 Ariz. 360, 368, 236 P.2d 48, 54 (1951). Based on these principles, we hold that AR.S. § 9-821.01, as amended in 2009, does not displace the method that voters of the City of Tucson chose under its 1929 charter for electing council…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Thornburg v. GinglesSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Johnson v. BradleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
- Axberg v. City of LincolnNebraska Supreme Court · 1942
- City of Tucson v. Tucson Sunshine Climate ClubArizona Supreme Court · 1945
- Forty-Seventh Legislature v. NapolitanoArizona Supreme Court · 2006
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Public Integrity Alliance, Inc. v. City of TucsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
- State Ex Rel Brnovich v. City of tucson/dewitArizona Supreme Court · 2017
- White Mountain Health Center, Inc. v. Maricopa CountyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2016
- City of Scottsdale v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2015
- City of Tucson, City of Phoenix v. State of Arizona Ken BennettCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.