CARROLL
v.
BECKER, SECRETARY OF STATE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Missouri's reduction in congressional representatives from sixteen to thirteen under the 1929 reapportionment act prompted a dispute over whether the state legislature could create new congressional districts, and the Supreme Court affirmed that when a state fails to enact valid redistricting legislation, representatives must be elected at large rather than from districts. The Court upheld the Secretary of State's refusal to file a candidacy declaration for a specific district when the proposed redistricting bill had been vetoed by the Governor and thus never became law.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Chief Justice Hughes delivered the opinion of the Court.
The State of Missouri, under the reapportionment of representatives in Congress (Act of June 18, 1929, c. 28, 46 Stat. 21, 26) is entitled to thirteen representatives in place of sixteen as theretofore. The petitioner brought this proceeding to obtain a writ of mandamus to compel the Secretary of State of Missouri to file a declaration of the petitioner’s candidacy for the office of representative in Congress in one of the congressional districts alleged to have been created by a bill passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate of Missouri in April 1931. An alternative writ was issued, and respondent, Secretary of State, alleged in his return that the bill in question had been vetoed by the Governor and hence had not become a valid law of the State. The Supreme Court of the State, in the view that Article I, section 4, of the Federal Constitution, provided for the enactment of laws, upheld the action of the Secretary of State and quashed the alternative writ. The court also decided that “ since the number of representatives for Missouri has been reduced-the former districts no longer exist and representatives must be elected at large.” 45 S. W. (2d) 533. A writ of certiorari was granted by this Court.
' The questions are substantially the same as those which were presented in Smiley v. Holm, decided this day, ante, p. 355, and the judgment is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Mr. Justice Cardozo took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (U.S. 1962)…S. 135. In such instances there is no conflict between state policy and the exercise of federal judicial [*285] power. This distinction explains the decisions in Smiley v. Holm, 285 U. S. 355; Koenig v. Flynn, 285 U. S. 375; and Carroll v. Becker, 285 U. S. 380, in which the Court released state constitutional provisions prescribing local lawmaking procedures from misconceived restriction of superior federal requirements. Adjudication of the federal claim involved in those cases was not one demanding the a…1 / 3
-
Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1964)…equally persuasive here. Indeed, as one of the grounds there relied on to support our holding that state apportionment controversies are justiciable we said: . . Smiley v. Holm, 285 U. S. 355, Koenig v. Flynn, 285 U. S. 375, and Carroll v. Becker, 285 U. S. 380, concerned the choice of Representatives in the Federal Congress. Smiley, Koenig and Carroll settled the issue in favor of justiciability of questions of congressional redistricting. The Court followed these precedents in Colegrove although over the…1 / 3
-
Colegrove v. Green, 328 U.S. 549 (U.S. 1946)…N. E. 750; Daly v. Madison County, 378 Ill. 357, 38 N. E. 2d 160. Cf. Moran v. Bowley, 347 Ill. 148, 179 N. E. 526. 28 U. S. C. 41 (14); Bell v. Hood, 327 U. S. 678. Smiley v. Holm, 285 U. S. 355; Koenig v. Flynn, 285 U. S. 375; Carroll v. Becker, 285 U. S. 380; Wood v. Broom, 287 U. S. 1; Nixon v. Herndon, 273 U. S. 536, 540; McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U. S. 1, 23-24; see also cases collected in 2 A. L. R. note, 1337 et seq. Coleman v. Miller, 307 U. S. 433, 438, 467. Ex parte Young, 209 U. S. 123; Sterl…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence