Opinion ID: 876640
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Interpretation of this Opinion

Text: There are other contentions raised by relator and other parties, but they need no discussion by us, as we are of the opinion Initiative No. 80 is validly proposed for adoption or rejection by the electors at this time. We also find that the Attorney General's statement of the implications of the vote are fairly stated. Beyond stating the Initiative is one properly submitted for a vote, nothing in this opinion should be interpreted as an expression of opinion by us, one way or the other, as to the merits of the proposed Initiative, or as to any future issues of constitutionality or validity therein, or the application of the provisions of the Initiative, if it should be adopted into law. This opinion is limited to the proposition that we find nothing in the matters presented to us that invalidates the submission of Initiative No. 80 to a vote. The complaint of relator for an injunction is denied and the complaint dismissed. It is not necessary to act on the intervener's application for intervention. No party is entitled to costs or attorney fees from any other party. HASWELL, C.J., and HARRISON, SHEA and DALY, JJ., concur.