Court Opinion

ID: 9425044
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 23:13:32.390576+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:22:53.428599
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice White,
with whom Mr. Justice Rehnquist joins,
dissenting.
The Ohio mayor who judged this case had no direct financial stake in its outcome. Tumey v. Ohio, 273 U. S. 510 (1927), is therefore not controlling, and I would not extend it.
To justify striking down the Ohio system on its face, the Court must assume either that every mayor-judge in every case will disregard his oath and administer justice contrary to constitutional commands or that this will happen often enough to warrant the prophylactic, per se rule urged by petitioner. I can make neither assumption with respect to Ohio mayors nor with respect to similar officials in 16 other States. Hence, I would leave the due process matter to.be decided on a case-by-case basis, a question which, as I understand the posture of this case, is not now before us. I would affirm the judgment.