Document: 393 U.S. 23 89 S.Ct. 5 21 L.Ed.2d 24 Glen A. WILLIAMS et al., Appellants,v.James RHODES al. SOCIALIST LABOR PARTY Appellants, v. James Nos. 543, 544. Argued Oct. 7, 1968. Decided 15, David J. Young, Columbus, Ohio, and Jerry Gordon, Cleveland Heights, for appellants, pro hac vice, by special leave of Court. Charles S. Lopeman, appellees. Mr. Justice BLACK delivered the opinion 1 The State Ohio in a series election laws has made it virtually impossible new political party, even though hundreds thousands members, or an old which very small number to be placed on state ballot choose electors pledged particular candidates Presidency Vice United States. 2 Revised Code, § 3517.01, requires party obtain petitions signed qualified totaling 15% ballots cast last preceding gubernatorial election. detailed provisions other result imposition substantial additional burdens, were accurately summarized Judge Kinneary's dissenting court below substantially agreed members that court.1 Together these various restrictive make any qualify except Republican Democratic Parties. These two Parties face smaller burdens because they are allowed retain their positions simply obtaining 10% votes need not signature petitions. Moreover, no provision position independent as distinguished from parties. claims power keep minority parties off under Art. II, 1, Constitution, provides that: 3 'Each shall appoint, such Manner Legislature thereof may direct, Number Electors, equal whole Senators Representatives entitled Congress * *.' 4 American Independent Party, appellant No. Socialist Labor 544, both brought suit challenge validity applied them, ground deny voters who might wish vote them protection laws, guaranteed against abridgment Equal Protection Clause Fourteenth Amendment. three-judge District Court designated try case ruled unconstitutional but refused grant full relief had sought, 290 F.Supp. 983 (D.C.S.D.Ohio 1968), have appealed this cases arose way: Party was formed January 1968 partisans former Governor George C. Wallace Alabama. During following six months campaign conducted signatures give place over 450,000 eventually obtained, more than 433,100 required. contends agrees due interaction several required filed February 1968, so Secretary informed would given ballot. Neither pleadings, affidavits before Court, arguments there, nor our denied enough meet requirement law. Having demonstrated its numerical strength, argued including early deadline filing primary conforming rigorous standards, certain laws. unanimously with contention must provide space write-in votes. A majority hold, however, Party's name printed ballot, his adherents been guilty 'laches' too late allow opportunity remedy, time presidential balloting, defects held law possessed. appellants 543 then moved Stewart, Circuit Sixth Circuit, injunction order put pending appeal. After consulting available, after represented interlocutory interests efficient operation electoral machinery if considered chances successful statutes good, Stewart granted injunction, 69. 6 all formal attributes regular party. It conventions Executive Committee law, permitted until 1948. Since then, total position, indeed conceded could do year. same panel heard reached similar result—write-in ordered Party. In assigned membership 108 delay bringing reasons refusing complete motion stay Court's judgment presented days he case. principally failure move quickly relief, consequent confusion caused requiring once again begin completely reprinting ballots, set oral argument, along I. 7 Ohio's claim political-question doctrine precludes judicial consideration little discussion. That rejected kind numerous times. 1892 McPherson Blacker, 146 23—24, 13 3, 6, 36 L.Ed. 869 recently squarely Baker Carr, 369 186, 208—237, 82 691, 705—721, 663 (1962), Wesberry Sanders, 376 5—7, 84 526, 528—530, 11 481 (1964). Other effect now cited. raise justiciable controversy Constitution cannot relegated arena. II. 8 also absolute pleases selection First Section Second Article providing Electors *' President President. There, course, can question section does extensive States pass regulating electors. But is filled specific legislate areas; powers always subject limitation exercised way violates Constitution. For example, broad 'lay collect Taxes,'2 taxing power, is, invoked violate privilege self-incrimination.3 Nor thought select express constitutional commands specifically bar passing kinds Clearly, Fifteenth Nineteenth Amendments intended Federal Government denying right grounds race sex elections. And Twenty-fourth Amendment clearly literally bars imposing poll tax 'for President.' Obviously we reject notion gives impose vote, where expressly prohibited provisions. We therefore hold elections Amendment's command 'No person laws.' III. 9 turn whether properly us denial true firmly established principle every minor difference application different groups violation many times 'invidious' distinctions enacted without Clause.4 determining Clause, consider facts circumstances behind protecting, those disadvantaged classification.5 present situation different, although overlapping, rights individuals associate advancement beliefs, voters, regardless persuasion, effectively. Both rights, rank among most precious freedoms. repeatedly freedom association protected Amendment.6 course federal encroachment infringement States.7 Similarly said reference vote: free country having voice which, good citizens, live. basic, illusory undermined.'8 10 No extended discussion establish old, decided advantage struggling existence thus unequal associate. form goals means kept win So also, heavily burdened only one at when clamoring stake, decisions consistently 'only compelling interest regulation within State's regulate justify limiting freedoms.' NAACP Button, 371 415, 438, 83 328, 341 (1963). here failed show 'compelling interest' justifies heavy 12 asserts served restrictions imposes. validly promote two-party system encourage compromise stability. fact merely favor 'two-party system'; favors parties—the Republicans Democrats tends monopoly. There reason why should permanent monopoly people them. Competition ideas governmental policies core process New organize reasonable requirements just past. makes variety support points out, three possible 50% runner-up preferred plurality winner voters. Concededly, attempting see choice stifle growth working increase strength year Considering totality, severe voting associational imposed. 14 argues structure organized insures disagree major 'will leadership well issues' since leader attempts capitalize disaffection group forced submit other, possibly attractive, leaders issues compete allegiance disaffected group. while goal desirable, achieve it. principal change some extent year, identity likely nominees known shortly election, 'group' will rarely ever cohesive identifiable few Thus, burdensome procedures, organization activities date, operate prevent getting denies 'disaffected' well. 15 Finally highly justified large confronted confusing popular frustrated. experience States, prior 1948, demonstrates handful low signatures, 1% electorate, required.9 multitudinous fragmentary regulatory control danger seems 'theoretically imaginable.'10 remote immediate crippling impact basic involved 16 Of circumstances, relevant considering Clause. And, said, left voting, include relating qualification functions totality taken imposes burden invidious discrimination, IV. 17 This leaves propriety judgments get right, despite ballots. restricted relief. went challenge, prayed broader declaring invalid. asked On record, stand us. Immediately entered judgment, hearing. At hearing disrupting there long delay, different. concluded issued staying objected elections; accordingly, repeats statement serious disruption process. Certainly date extremely difficult, impossible, still another attend last-minute poses risk interference absentee Under require permit remain President, subject, compliance valid affirmed case, modified granting ordered. 18 Judgment 544 543. 19 STEWART concurs insofar equitable appellants. 20 DOUGLAS. through entangling web effectively foreclosed Democrats. done initially abolishing restrict candidacy names ballot;1 eliminated enjoy endorsement party;2 defined 'political party' exclude parties.3 22 candidate seeks first compile least signatures. succeed gathering general nominating petition February.4 all: compiled further received nomination qualifies meaning law.5 wide support; trace party.6 To participate primary, electing each county ward precinct central committee; congressional district committee;7 delegates alternates national convention.8 seek committeemen convention demonstrate did during four years;9 behalf anywhere five 1,000 likewise primary.10 third erect elaborate machinery, rest upon ranks proved unwilling unable vote. elected committee, convene attended 500 duly apportioned throughout according strength.11 Delegates go certification November nominate President.12 Ohioans, sure, decision below, writing man operative representing him; prevented presenting slate certification, effect. Furthermore, operative, write-ins substitute 25 force rely writeins him disability. difficult elected, elect him. 26 barriers timing, great obstacles. Taken together render disagrees run opposition, ticket. 27 provided unnecessary decide rather officials, appointment already chosen suffrage. so, encumber conditions character imposed here. 28 Amendment, applicable lies root cases. 'orderly activity' (NAACP 430, 336, 405), 'to engage beliefs ideas' Alabama ex rel. Patterson, 357 449, 460, 78 1163, 1171, 1488), activity nature protection. As Bates City Little Rock, 361 516, 523, 80 412, 416, 480 'freedom purpose advancing airing grievances Due Process invasion States.' Louisiana Gremillion NAACP, 366 293, 296, 81 1333, 1335, 301. vote—a 'fundamental right' 'preservative rights.' Yick Wo Hopkins, 118 356, 370, 1064, 1071, 30 220. expression assembly 'illusory undermined.' 17, 535, 481. 29 life, often important channels dissent aired: 'All channeled into programs History amply virtue minority, dissident groups, innumerable vanguard democratic whose ultimately accepted. absence voices symptom grave illness society.' Sweezy Hampshire, 354 234, 250—251, 77 1203, 1212, 1311 (opinion Warren, C.J.). permits classifications treat uniformly. Nevertheless, bans 'invidious discrimination.' Harper Virginia Board Elections, 383 663, 667, 86 1079, 1081, 169. 31 protects (Carrington Rash, 380 89, 85 775, 675), economic units, racial communities, entities. When liberties' issue (Harper supra, 670, 1083), less leeway making deals matters. I think citizens whomsoever please campaigns school choose, whatever part spectrum reflects. 32 Cumbersome suffocate association, promotion action, effects. interest, 'compelling' not, abridging 'the men drafted Bill Rights 'balancing' field.' Konigsberg Bar, 36, 61, 997, 1012, 105 (Black, J., dissenting). Appellees imply 'no speech assert sufficient weight induce uphold abridgment.' (Id., 67, S.Ct., 1015.) suggestion.13 33 use Yet refrained ordering relying partly laches presence what deemed so-called 'political' questions. 983. 1083) well-established inclusion justiciable, 'political,' questions; grants meets practical needs appellees preparing distributing 34 lineage goes back contest 1892, 1964 Today, earnestly presses recognition. started action concededly decline courts play disruptive role merits, strong my Brother HARLAN states apparently agrees. proper declaratory 35 Hence concur today's decision; and, emphasis Court's, join opinion. HARLAN, concurring result. 37 agree Presidential forthcoming that, stated not. However, entirely proposition statutory scheme assured See 405 (1964); (1960); 1488 (1958). directly limited appellants' assemble discuss public solicit members. Compare Thomas Collins, 323 65 315, 430 (1945); De Jonge Oregon, 299 353, 57 255, 278 (1937); Near Minnesota Olson, 283 697, 51 625, 75 1357 (1931). Instead, procedure selected, incentive conducting activities, thereby depriving much substance, form, rights. one's views appropriate authority association. 38 follows method decisive importance solution problem Just court, legislature, cf. Eastern R.R. Presidents Conference Noerr Motor Freight, Inc., 365 127, 137—138, 529—530, 464 (1961); Rumely, 345 41, 46—47, 73 546—547, 97 770 (1953); Harriss, 347 612, 625—626, 74 808, 811, 816—817, 98 989 (1954); body Electors. Consequently, may, Electoral beyond electorate. remains same—no matter institution entrusted, statute people, empowered ultimate State. 39 limit invoking impelling policy justification doing so. BLACK'S demonstrates, able advance almost half million fundamental purposes. selected. 40 deciding impression, draw Clause.1 am clear doctrine, especially propounded recent reapportionment cases, e.g., Reynolds Sims, 377 533, 1362, 506 (1964), adjudicate disputes involving mere governed profoundly principles.2 Despite doubts score, perfectly consistent applicable. believe task involves mechanical found Rather, attempt accommodate best narrow Philadelphia Convention principles announced generations later. 41 resting solely accommodation—for holding fully respects original purposes development College. looks language considers Convention's understanding College, approach seen undermine draftsmen understood essence. College created knowledgeable community executive nation continental dimensions preclude citizenry large.3 If declares entire class ineligible Elector, individual merit plays part, strikes basis originally conceived. 42 purpose. While Madison reports district-by-district 'mostly, exclusively, view framed adopted,' M. Farrand, Records 1787, p. 459 (1911), quite significant, dominant, group4 contemplated methods. legislatures leeway.5 decades Republic, adopt methods selecting Electors,6 pointed to, found, legislature attempted enfranchised office choice.7 43 Nothing history moment inception, indicates compromised refuse read arbitrary radically inconsistent obstacle absent overriding attention 44 word added about status eligible understand successfully gathered reach case—for comply command. opinion, striking down entirety, does, it, afford provision, deal explicitly done. 45 view, requirement, regarded isolation, fall. suggests, legitimate invoke defense barrier third-party candidacies fear barrier, proliferate numbers create voter confusion.8 reasonably related interest. Even unprecedented event utter parties, divided relatively evenly groups. freedoms unlikely hypothesis incursion eight light experience, carry significant confusion. history9 actions overwhelming States10 suggest, opening effective functioning sum, fallen far short showing necessary overcome otherwise 46 disproportionate magnitude act prevent, size legitimately ground. instance. 47 STEWART, 48 function own wise policy, inclined Brethren authorities disregard deal, power. me written, 49 either nationally state-by-state basis. contrary, specifies: 50 *.'1 (Emphasis supplied.) 'The respective Vice-President *.'2 52 Chief Fuller, therefore, stating obvious wrote unanimous years ago: 53 constitution voted ticket, exercise elective franchise alone recognizes representatives exclusively define effecting object. 54 'In short, mode belong Id., 27, 35, 10. 55 itself. Such utilized history, State, Colorado, 1876.3 Or slates electors, between Indeed, formerly cooperative electorates.4 56 Here, gone further, forward evenhanded long-standing told today, nonetheless violated way. perceive violation. spite unfettered choosing Three separate amendments legislature's included process, excluded 'on account race, color, previous condition servitude.' equally sex.' prohibits exclusion 'by pay tax.' Ohio. 58 holds jurisdiction opinions emphasize principles, guarantees, summarily concluding concede limitations discriminates religious belief. 59 standard adjudication Clause—a discrimination' forbidden—is stringent test single quotation suffice summarize protection: 60 safeguard offended classification rests wholly irrelevant achievement objective. presumed acted practice, inequality. discrimination aside conceived it.' McGowan Maryland, 420, 425—426, 1101, 1104, 393. 61 standard.5 62 classify access strength.6 Those timely widespread neither participated past 90 not.7 discriminate They 'reasonable' qualifying standards become unwieldy, high, contend, legislative parties—even like gained considerably 'splinter' support—off requirements, conclude, persons 63 concedes objective underlying appearance demonstrated. drawn 'irrelevant objective'—the traditional judging Clause—is clear. much, invalid—a believe, regarding permissibility critical determination. 64 discern illegitimate one. Surely justifiably seeing By preventing gaining places tend guard possibility small-party contenders votes—and secured gain are, vis-a -vis opponents, voting.8 attainment objectives scope One perhaps theory based, inconceivable philosophy satisfied award pursuing has, time, authorized held. My seem suggest percentage figure early. second-guessing. necessarily arbitrary, represent accommodating conflicting involved.9 66 Although freeze participants continue polled suggested disparity invidiously discriminatory. accept constitutionally compelled apply precisely applies regard 67 abstract differences disparate classes support, event, conclude figures somewhat uniformly remaining argument never requirement: enacted, meeting standard. notice election—the Parties—had specified entry totally unrealistic, 'any (that) conceived.' U.S., 426, 1105. 68 appears ensure thwart one, vindicated. assertion echo Brethren—a appellants—that infringe agree. 69 clear, electors.10 take legitimacy stifling existence. cite protecting termed 405; 480; 1488; 430; 278. based call 70 Collins design freely social views. certainly nature. cited, National Association Advancement Colored People, challenged calculated affect determine certainty (1) considerable impairment (2) underlie insubstantial contexts presented. conclusions prerequisites here, serve activity, Cf. O'Brien, 391 367, 88 1673, 672. 71 instance, accord disclose lists, outlined follows: 72 'We production order, question, entailing likelihood restraint petitioner's Petitioner uncontroverted occasions revelation rank-and-file exposed reprisal, loss employment, threat physical coercion, manifestations public, hostility. apparent disclosure adversely ability petitioner pursue collective effort foster admittedly advocate, withdraw dissuade others joining exposure shown associations consequences exposure. final disclosures deterrent '* exclusive (of authorities) intrastate business foreign corporation registration statute, lists expected help resolve question. litigation commenced bill equity ouster Without intimating slightest merits issues, bearing 462—464, 1172—1173. identical involved, stated: 76 'On record sufficiently compulsory local branches People work evidence identification organizations followed harassment threats bodily harm. hostitlity reprisals follow discouraged induced withdraw. repressive effect, private attitudes pressures, bear threatened members' names. government aspects speculative remote. 'Decision finally turn, cities instrumentalities cogent ln* find correlation municipalities occupational license taxes publication People. 523—525, 417—418.11 79 comparable dissidents assemble, speak, write, proselytize fit. modify up organizations. question—they secure support. demonstrating conclusion disability significantly impairs sheer speculation. Brethern's surveys product forces legal minimal flourished, moribund. Mere speculation ought strike Nor, think, confidence prevail insensitivity federalism possess tell scale values, somehow unworthy implementation.12 today. V. college anachronism overhaul.13 citizen, happen share view. vests discretion unwise Constitution.14 WHITE, says carried out framework nascent contention. connection, suggestion potential unreasonably. presentation winnowing surely policy. pursuant objective, base itself unreasonable. combination unconstitutional, how objections complied participation primary. whatsoever admits ignored date. Had commence mention complain gather signatures—which subsequently—or progress toward encountered later obstacle. phases excuse complying preconditions impose. Why insists impermissible, demerits, books questionable mystery position. WARREN, dissenting. 87 seven questions rationale guarantee elections, national, state, local. Already, litigants Alabama, California, Illinois, requested eve fair say ramifications today deliberated nearly year.1 Appellants' belated requests extraordinary unhurried deliberation essential formulation sound principles. impending distinction suits July August 29, week petitioned provisional September sought issued. other. result, presumably Parties.2 treated alike; otherwise, bowing applying Appellants courts. Placed context, presents Court: abuse appellants?3 review convinces emergency denied. end 19th century, achieved enactment 1948 challenges,4 2, press Similarly, supporters institute 1967 expressed Presidency,5 spring voiced concern laws.6 91 Because assumes reflect submitted verified; fact, file date.7 92 delays instituting voting. choice, worst, competing 93 imminence Parties' partial conjunction orderly federalstate relationships. Our replete concerning afforded sensitive areas, yet address analogous area apportionment, tolerated temporary dilution protect fashioning see, Lucas Forty-Fourth General Assembly 713, 739, 1459, 1475, 632 Davis Mann, 678, 692—693, 1441, 1448—1449, 609 desegregation greater deference occasion, counseled abstention allegedly infringed legislation. Harrison 360 167, 1025, 1152 (1959). 94 WMCA, Inc. Lomenzo, 633, 1418, 568 apportionment York's Legislature, remand 'acting whether, York fashion plan, desirable legislators existing (unconstitutional) provisions, effectuation weighted delayed election.'8 655, 1429. added.) Green County School Board, 1689, 716 (1968), Term, example refrain usurping areas traditionally entrusted Brown Education, 349 294, 753, 99 1083 (1965), schools 'all deliberate speed.' 'freedom-of-choice' plan adopted board muster, remanded formulate plan. 95 compatible recognized concern, manifested preserving system. none delegation unequivocal U.S.Const., 1. 96 net giving appraise litigation9 eliminate Given lateness hour demands federalism, demanded. discretionary powers, resolution request challenging constitutionality raised fairly classified impression:10 candidate's desire ballot? stated, necessity evolve answer confined unresolved restrictions, any, 'package,' guidance, contains intimations considerations—a seeking evidenced sometime degree organization. With propositions attenuated applicability Whatever know attacked comport standards. Zwickler Koota, 389 241, 391, 444 (1967),11 resolved below. deliberation, dispose manner clearer determination 100 explore adequately actions, Kinneary describes, obstacles would-be fulfilled: 'First, committee consisting committees (Ohio Rev.Code §§ 3517.02—3517.04.) Second, convention. 3505.10.) 3513.19.1, Rev.Code, delegate committeeman member period, twelve hundred previously party's willing delegates. Third, 3513.05.) term 'qualified electors' Code (§ 3501.01(H)), 3513.19), elector who, or, before. plaintiffs would, necessity, sign petitions, party.' I, 8, cl. Marchetti 390 39, 889 (1968); Grosso 62, 716, 906 (1968). Skinner Oklahoma Williamson, 316 539—541, 1110, 1112—1113, 1655 (1942); Cox Louisiana, 379 536, 557, 453, 465, 471 (1965); 220 (1886); 483, 686, 873 Loving Com. Virginia, 388 1817, 1010 (1967). See, Carrington 675 supra. Mine Workers America, Dist. Illinois Bar Assn., 217, 426 (1967); (1963); Times Co. Sullivan, 254, 276—277, 710, 723—724, 686 535. Forty-two electorate appear arisen lenient 224, 357. 3505.03 (1930 Repl.Vol.). municipal offices, 3513.251—3513.252; 3513.256; office, excluding 3513.257—3513.258. 3505.10, 3513.05—3513.191, 3517.01 3517.04. must, 3513.256—3513.262. 3513.258. 3505.10. 3517.02—3517.04. 3513.191. 3513.05. 3513.11. Ohion 3513.12. 528, 419, (Black Douglas, JJ., concurring); Smith 147, 157, 215, 220, 205 concurring). pitch reaching stage complex 'one man, vote' Sims followed. population, consent fell House, N. Peirce, People's 43—50 L. Wilmerding, 17—22 Federalist Papers, (Alexander Hamilton) (H. Lodge ed. 1908); Association, Electing n. 10; R. MacBride, 16—17 (1953). leaders, varying ideological convictions, favored Hamilton, Madison, Wilson, John Dickinson, Rufus King, Daniel Carroll, Abraham Baldwin. opponents Gerry, Ellsworth, Luther Martin, Roger Sherman. Fuller's illuminating 28, (1892). 13—14. story 17—22. direct precise clause 45. itself, at-large basis, list selected ways. 28—33, 8—10; c. 3; 309. leading area, claim. plaintiffs-in-error Michigan's district-by-district, atlarge, plenary alter grounds. Pursuing analysis, defect, 37—40, 11—13. doubt continuing holding. pointing occasion reality me, structures designed runoff mandated gains majority, compare Fortson Morris, 385 231, 446, 330 (1966). Alternatively, indicate second Presidency—if first-choice votes, second-choice considered. Finally, apportioning approximating text, 4, alternatives Flowers, 288, 307-308, 1302, 1313—1314, 325 Saia York, 334 558, 562, 1148, 1150, 1574 (1948); Martin Struthers, 319 141, 146—149, 862, 864—866, 1313 (1943); Thornhill 310 88, 96, 736, 741, 1093 (1940); Schneider Jersey, 308 146, 155 (1939), requirement. 1952. Before registered unexacting regime instructive. Voting statistics reveal 1900 appeared statewide office. attained 1908. regime, record. took Henry 30,000 3,000,000 Harry Truman 7,000 increased marginally. grouped categories candidacies: Constitutional salutary 869. U.S.Const. Amend. 12. Twelfth specifies procedures receives college. '(V)arious modes pursued, as, joint ballot; concurrent houses; ticket; districts; districts legislature; ways 8. fuller description diverse pursued appointing Courtry's century id., 26—35, 7—10. 663; Gray 372 368, 801, 821, 506, suggests apposite. sustained right. plainly object partisan organizations, via 'independent petition.' cited 3513.05, 3513.11, 3513.19, 3513.191, participating time. examine 3517.01. context contests illustrated hypothetical example. Assume faction parties—party A—becomes dissatisfied sets 'third party'—party C—putting liking. Still, C prefer B. B's poll, 46% A's 44%, C's 10%. B, preferring overwhelmingly A's, victory. specified, enact. Minor Happersett, Wall. 162, 178, 627: '(T)he confer suffrage furthermore, invalid involved. told, opinions, enforce requirements. 'less restrictive' above, utilize achieving ends another. mentioned entail arguably frustrate interests. enacted. problems solved facile unelaborated suggestions alternatives'; easy answers satisfactory. Similar being 1804, adoption 33, Part IV April 19—20, 1961. May 1961, reargument reargued October 9, March 26, 1962, argument. considerations: presented, authorities, canvassed appeal Williams Rhodes He representations significance interim physically orders Brotherhood Locomotive Engineers M.—K.—T. Co., 363 1326, 1330, 1379 Fuel Gas Public Serv. Comm'n, 322, 326, 158, 402 (1929). Complaint pp. 1—2. Times, Jan. 1967, 20, col. 3. Commencing began four—day tour northern conference Pittsburgh difficulty Aides California encountered. 5. 3513.256—3513.262, (1960 Repl. Vol.). brief July. Brief 86. Preisler 279 952 (D.C.W.D.Mo.1967), probable noted sub nom. Kirkpatrick Preisler, 939, 1053, 1129 aptly paid area. 1965, Western Missouri 1961 Congressional Redistricting Act 'until 238 187, 191 (D.C.W.D.Mo.1965). 1965 Act. 5, 1966, nevertheless 1966 void act. 257 953 (D.C.W.D.Mo.1966). 1967. 450, 613, 511. enact December invalidated. 952. Scott Germano, 381 407, 409, 1525, 1527, 477 'power judiciary redistricting encouraged.' MacDougall Green, 335 281, (1948), Illinois' representative reign Colegrove 328 549, 1198, 1432 (1946). progeny matrix (1966), post-election procedure, initial qualification. duty appropriateness irrespective issuance injunction.' 399.

Category: 1