Hawke v. Smith (No. 1), 253 U.S. 221 (1920)

Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 253 U.S. 219, click here.

Hawke v. Smith (No. 1)

No. 582

Argued April 23, 1920
Decided June 1, 1920
253 U.S. 221

ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT

OF THE STATE OF OHIO

Syllabus

Under the Constitution, Art. V, a proposed amendment can be ratified by two methods only -- by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states or by conventions in three-fourths of the states, the choice of method being left to Congress. P. 226.

The term "legislatures," as used here and elsewhere in the Constitution, means the deliberative, representative bodies that make the law for the people of the respective states; the Constitution make no provision for action upon such proposals by the people directly. P. 227.

The function of a state legislature in ratifying a proposed amendment to the federal Constitution, like the function of Congress in proposing such amendments, is a federal function, derived not from the people of that state, but from the Constitution. P. 230.

The ratification of a proposed amendment to the federal Constitution by the legislature of a state is not an act of legislation in the proper sense of the word; it is but the expression of the assent of the state to the proposed amendment. P. 229. Davis v. Hildebrant, 241 U.S. 565, distinguished.

The action of the General Assembly of Ohio ratifying the proposed Eighteenth Amendment cannot be referred to the electors of the state, the provisions of the state constitution requiring such a referendum being inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States. P. 231.

100 Ohio St. 385 reversed.

The case is stated in the opinion.