OCR Text |
Show COURT'S DECISION HIIS DOPE OF IIS I CONSTITUTIONAL PROPOSALS CAN NOT BE SUBMITTED j FOR RATIFICATION. I i . Action of Legislature In Ratification of the Dry Law Is Final, and Ef-j Ef-j forts of Wets to Overturn De-, De-, cision Comes to Naught. Washington. The supreme court in ! a unanimous opinion on June 1, held j that federal constitutional amend-' amend-' meats cannot be submitted to popular vote for ratification by states having referendum provisions in their constitutions. con-stitutions. The method of ratifying amendments, amend-ments, the court held, is a national power specifically granted by the federal constitution and the states have no authority to provide otherwise. other-wise. In so holding, the court declared de-clared Inoperative provisions of the Ohio state constitution authorizing .submission of federal amendments to a referendum for ratification, and overturned state supreme court decrees de-crees dismissing Injunction proceedings proceed-ings in a taxpayer's suit to enjoin submission of the prohibition and woman's wo-man's suffrage amendments to a referendum vote. Next to the cases Involving the validity of the prohibition amendment nnd the enforcement, the Ohio referendum refer-endum cases were considered the most Important before the supreme court. The decision does not affect the pending pend-ing prohibition cases. The court's opinion, however, puts an end to any controversy as to whether Ohio has ratified both amendments amend-ments and puts Ohio definitely in the list of states approving each of the amendments. Power to ratify a federal amend-amendment, amend-amendment, according to the court's opinion, which was rendered by Associate As-sociate Justice Day, is derived from the federal constitution and a state has no authority to designate the means of ratification. |