Carroll v. Becker, 285 U.S. 380 (1932). · Go Syfert
Search
Carroll v. Becker, 285 U.S. 380 (1932). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
94 citation events (3 in the last 25 years) across 16 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Preisler v. Secretary of State of Missouri (mowd, 1966-08-05)
Treatment trajectory · 1932 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1932 1979 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Preisler v. Secretary of State of Missouri (2×)
W.D. Mo. · 1966 · confidence medium
Missouri was advised in the latter case over thirty years ago that a Missouri General Assembly’s failure to reapportion congressional districts in accordance with law required that “unless and until new districts are created, all Representatives allocated to the state must be elected by the state at large” (285 U.S. at 374-375, 52 S.Ct. at 402).
examined Cited "see" Swanson v. Illinois (3×)
N.D. Ill. · 1964 · signal: see · confidence high
See Smiley v. Holm, 285 U.S. 355 , 52 S.Ct. 397 , 76 L.Ed. 795 (1932) and Carroll v. Becker, 285 U.S. 380 , 52 S.Ct. 402 , 76 L.Ed. 807 (1932), holding constitutional at large •elections of members of the United States House of Representatives.
examined Cited "see, e.g." Saunders v. Wilkins (3×)
4th Cir. · 1945 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also, Carroll v. Becker, 285 U. S. 380 , 52 S.Ct. 402 , 76 L.Ed. 807 ; Smiley v. Holm, 285 U.S. 355 , 52 S.Ct. 397 , 76 L.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Carroll
v.
Becker, Secretary of State
805.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 11, 1932.
285 U.S. 380
Messrs. Edward F. Collada-y and Hyman G. Stein for petitioner., .Mr. Ray Weightman, Assistant Attorney General of Missouri, with whom Messrs. Stratton Shartel, Attorney General, and L. Cunningham were on the brief, for respondent.
Hughes, Cardozo.
Cited by 36 opinions  |  Published
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, 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, section 4, of the Federal Constitution, provided for the enactment[*382] 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. A writ of certiorari was granted by this Court.

' The questions are substantially the same as those which were presented in Smiley v. Holm, decided this day, ante, p. 355, and the judgment is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Mr. Justice Cardozo took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.