Carroll v. Becker

285 U.S. 380, 52 S. Ct. 402, 76 L. Ed. 807, 1932 U.S. LEXIS 442
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided April 11, 1932·No. 805·Published·Cited by 36 cases

Opinion

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 *382 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.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Carroll v. Becker, 285 U.S. 380, 52 S. Ct. 402, 76 L. Ed. 807, 1932 U.S. LEXIS 442 (1932).

285 U.S. 380 (Carroll v. Becker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Agre v. Wolf
284 F. Supp. 3d 591 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 2018)
De Vesa v. Dorsey
634 A.2d 493 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1993)
Commonwealth v. Neely
44 Pa. D. & C.3d 370 (Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, 1987)
Carey v. Klutznick
508 F. Supp. 404 (S.D. New York, 1980)
Montgomery County Council v. Garrott
222 A.2d 164 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1966)
Preisler v. Secretary of State of Missouri
257 F. Supp. 953 (W.D. Missouri, 1966)
Lampkin v. Connor
239 F. Supp. 757 (District of Columbia, 1965)
People Ex Rel. Daniels v. Carpentier
198 N.E.2d 514 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1964)
Swanson v. Illinois
226 F. Supp. 699 (N.D. Illinois, 1964)
Wesberry v. Sanders
376 U.S. 1 (Supreme Court, 1964)
Alsup v. Mayhall
208 F. Supp. 713 (S.D. Alabama, 1962)
Baker v. Carr
369 U.S. 186 (Supreme Court, 1962)
W. M. C. A., Inc. v. Simon
202 F. Supp. 741 (S.D. New York, 1962)
Scholle v. Secretary of State
104 N.W.2d 63 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1960)
Stemmler v. Einstein
297 S.W.2d 467 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1957)
Colegrove v. Green
328 U.S. 549 (Supreme Court, 1946)
Saunders v. Wilkins
152 F.2d 235 (Fourth Circuit, 1945)
Brown v. Saunders
166 S.E. 105 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1932)
Wood v. State Ex Rel. Gillespie
142 So. 747 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1932)