General Assembly of Colorado v. Lucas
| Decision Date | 01 February 1965 |
| Docket Number | No. 661,FORTY-FOURTH,661 |
| Citation | 13 L.Ed.2d 699,85 S.Ct. 715,379 U.S. 693 |
| Parties | GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF COLORADO et al. v. Andres LUCAS et al |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Duke W. Dunbar, Atty. Gen. of Colorado, Charles S. Vigil, Richard S. Kitchen, Sr., Stephen H. Hart and James Lawrence White, for appellants.
Charles Ginsberg and George Louis Creamer, for appellees.
Insofar as the judgment of the District Court decides federal questions, it is affirmed. Insofar as the judgment decides other questions, it is vacated and the cause is remanded for further consideration in light of the supervening decision of the Colorado Supreme Court in White v. Anderson, Colo., 394 P.2d 333 (1964).
It is our understanding that the Court's disposition of this case leaves it open to the District Court to abstain on the question as to the severability of the various provisions of Amendment No. 7, pending resolution of that issue with reasonable promptitude in further state court proceedings. We deem it appropriate explicitly to state our view that this is the course which the District Court should follow. On this basis, we join the Court's opinion.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Andersen v. King County
...of Colo., 377 U.S. 713, 736, 84 S.Ct. 1459, 12 L.Ed.2d 632 (1964), aff'd in part and vacated in part on other grounds, 379 U.S. 693, 85 S.Ct. 715, 13 L.Ed.2d 699 (1965). As the Goodridge court noted, "history cannot and does not foreclose the constitutional question." 440 Mass. at 320, 798 ......
-
United States v. Raddatz
......See, e. g. , 5 U.S.C. § 557 (general rule under the Administrative Procedure Act); 29 U.S.C. § 160(c) ......
-
Dungan v. Sawyer
...by the Supreme Court of the United States, and by this opinion. 14 See note 13, supra. 15 Cf. Forty-fourth General Assembly of Colo. v. Lucas, 379 U.S. 693, 85 S.Ct. 715, 13 L.Ed.2d 699 (1965), and cautionary expression of Justice Harlan in his concurring opinion in Jordan v. Silver, 381 U.......
-
Kruidenier v. McCulloch
...84 S.Ct. 1918, 12 L.Ed.2d 1037. And the federal courts defer to us on state questions. Forty-fourth General Assembly of Colorado v. Lucas, 379 U.S. 693, 85 S.Ct. 715, 13 L.Ed.2d 699; and White v. Anderson, Colo., 394 P.2d 333, It should be pointed out the question of 'acting promptly' may b......