Court Opinion

ID: 9673795
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 04:18:36.285243+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:24.182197
License: Public Domain

Opinion on Petition to Rehear
Mr. Justice Creson.
We have been presented with a petition to rehear. The essence of this petition seems to be that some phraseology contained in the Court’s original opinion in this case has the effect of impeding or imperiling the appellant’s further review of the question made with respect to “discrimination” in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
We have, at some length, re-examined the original opinion, the petition to rehear and the reply thereto. On so doing, we think that the original opinion is entirely adequate as a basis for appellant’s presentation of her contention to any other court. What we said in the original opinion, and say again, is that if the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution rightly comes into play in the situation presented in this case, then there is a permissible “classification”, rather than an impermissible “discrimination”. We are content to abide the Court’s original opinion.
Petition to rehear is denied.
Burnett,- Chief Justice, and White, Dyer and Chattin, Justices, concur.