Hill v. Printing Industries of Gulf Coast

Supreme Court

Hill v. Printing Industries of Gulf Coast

422 U.S. 937, 95 S. Ct. 2670, 45 L. Ed. 2d 664, 1975 U.S. LEXIS 88

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedJune 30, 1975

Docket74-456

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 422 U.S. 937 (Hill v. Printing Industries of Gulf Coast) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hill v. Printing Industries of Gulf Coast, 422 U.S. 937, 95 S. Ct. 2670, 45 L. Ed. 2d 664, 1975 U.S. LEXIS 88 (1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The parties to this case have informed us that the State of Texas has enacted the Political Funds Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1975, which will become effective on September 1, 1975. † Section 11 of that Act substantially amends Art. 14.10 (b) (Supp. 1974-1975) of the Texas Election Code, the constitutionality of which is at issue in this appeal. Although the parties take the position that these amendments do not affect this case, *938 we prefer to remand the case to the District Court for reconsideration in light of the recent amendments, rather “than render an unnecessary judgment on the validity of the constitutional views expressed by the District Court.” White v. Regester, ante, p. 935.

The judgment of the District Court is vacated. The case is remanded to that court for reconsideration in light of the new legislation and for dismissal if the case is or becomes moot.

So ordered.

Mr. Justice Douglas took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

†

Tex. Const., Art. 3, § 39.

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

Per Curiam.

The parties to this case have informed us that the State of Texas has enacted the Political Funds Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1975, which will become effective on September 1, 1975. † Section 11 of that Act substantially amends Art. 14.10 (b) (Supp. 1974-1975) of the Texas Election Code, the constitutionality of which is at issue in this appeal. Although the parties take the position that these amendments do not affect this case, *938 we prefer to remand the case to the District Court for reconsideration in light of the recent amendments, rather “than render an unnecessary judgment on the validity of the constitutional views expressed by the District Court.” White v. Regester, ante, p. 935.

The judgment of the District Court is vacated. The case is remanded to that court for reconsideration in light of the new legislation and for dismissal if the case is or becomes moot.

So ordered.

Mr. Justice Douglas took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

†

Tex. Const., Art. 3, § 39.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

422 U.S. 937, 95 S. Ct. 2670, 45 L. Ed. 2d 664, 1975 U.S. LEXIS 88, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hill-v-printing-industries-of-gulf-coast-scotus-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack