Hawke Vs. Smith

Hawke vs Smith

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Jun-01-1920

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/93231

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/93231
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: Jun-01-1920
Case Number: 253 U.S. 231
Subject: Election

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Election

Key legal issue: Election

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Hawke

Respondent

Smith

Excerpt

hawke v. smith - 253 u.s. 231 (1920) u.s. supreme court hawke v. smith , 253 u.s. 231 (1920) hawke v. smith (no. 2) no. 601 argued april 23, 1920 decided june 1, 1920 253 u.s. 231 error to the supreme court of the state of ohio syllabus the ratification of the proposed nineteenth amendment by the legislature of ohio cannot be referred to the electors of the state; the ohio constitution, in requiring such a referendum, is inconsistent with the constitution of the united states. hawke v. smith, no. 1, ante, 253 u. s. 221 . 100 ohio st. 540 reversed. the case is stated in the opinion. page 253 u. s. 232 mr. justice day delivered the opinion of the court. this case presents the same question as that already decided in no. 582, ante, 253 u. s. 221 , the only difference being that the amendment involved is the proposed nineteenth amendment to the constitution extending the right of suffrage to women. the supreme court of ohio, upon the authority of its decision in hawke v. smith, (no. 582), ante, 253 u. s. 221 , held that the constitution of the state requiring such submission by a referendum to the people, did not violate article v of the federal constitution, and for that reason rendered a like judgment as in no. 582. for the reasons stated in our opinion in no. 582, the judgment of the supreme court of ohio must be reversed.

Full Judgment

Hawke v. Smith - 253 U.S. 231 (1920)
U.S. Supreme Court Hawke v. Smith , 253 U.S. 231 (1920)

Hawke v. Smith (No. 2)

No. 601

Argued April 23, 1920

Decided June 1, 1920

253 U.S. 231

ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT

OF THE STATE OF OHIO

SYLLABUS

The ratification of the proposed Nineteenth Amendment by the Legislature of Ohio cannot be referred to the electors of the state; the Ohio Constitution, in requiring such a referendum, is inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States. Hawke v. Smith, No. 1, ante, 253 U. S. 221 . 100 Ohio St. 540 reversed.

The case is stated in the opinion.

Page 253 U. S. 232

MR. JUSTICE DAY delivered the opinion of the Court.

This case presents the same question as that already decided in No. 582, ante, 253 U. S. 221 , the only difference being that the amendment involved is the proposed Nineteenth Amendment to the Constitution extending the right of suffrage to women. The Supreme Court of Ohio, upon the authority of its decision in Hawke v. Smith, (No. 582), ante, 253 U. S. 221 , held that the Constitution of the state requiring such submission by a referendum to the people, did not violate Article V of the federal Constitution, and for that reason rendered a like judgment as in No. 582.

For the reasons stated in our opinion in No. 582, the judgment of the Supreme Court of Ohio must be

Reversed.

Same Parties Hawke vs Smith Same Subject Election

Election supreme court The State in re