Carroll v. BeckerAnnotate this Case
285 U.S. 380 (1932)
U.S. Supreme Court
Carroll v. Becker, 285 U.S. 380 (1932)
Carroll v. Becker
Argued March 24, 1932
Decided April 11, 1932
285 U.S. 380
CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI
Decided upon the authority of Smiley v. Holm, ante, p. 285 U. S. 355.
328 Mo. ___, 45 S.W. 2d 533, affirmed.
Certiorari to review a judgment quashing an alternative writ of mandamus.
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE HUGHES delivered the opinion of the Court.
The State of Missouri, under the reapportionment of representatives in Congress (Act of June 18, 1929, c. 28, § 22, 46 Stat. 21, 26), is entitled to thirteen representatives in place of sixteen as theretofore. The petitioner brought this proceeding to obtain a writ of mandamus to compel the Secretary of State of Missouri to file a declaration of the petitioner's candidacy for the office of representative in Congress in one of the congressional districts alleged to have been created by a bill passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate of Missouri in April, 1931. An alternative writ was issued, and respondent, Secretary of State, alleged in his return that the bill in question had been vetoed by the governor, and hence had not become a valid law of the state. The supreme court of the state, in the view that Article I, § 4, of the Federal Constitution, provided for the enactment
of laws, upheld the action of the secretary of state and quashed the alternative writ. The court also decided that, "since the number of representatives for Missouri has been reduced, the former districts no longer exist, and representatives must be elected at large." 45 S.W.2d 533, 535. A writ of certiorari was granted by this Court.
The questions are substantially the same as those which were presented in Smiley v. Holm, ante, p. 285 U. S. 355, and the judgment is affirmed.
MR. JUSTICE CARDOZO took no part in the consideration and decision of this case.
Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.