McPherson v. Blacker

http://dbpedia.org/resource/McPherson_v._Blacker an entity of type: Thing

McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1 (1892), was a United States Supreme Court case decided on October 17, 1892. The case concerned a law passed in Michigan which divided the state into separate congressional districts and awarded one of the state's electoral votes to the winner of each district. The suit was filed by several of these electors chosen in the 1892 election, including William McPherson, against , the Secretary of State of Michigan. It was the first Supreme Court case to consider whether certain methods of states' appointments of their electors were constitutional. The Court, in a majority opinion authored by Chief Justice Melville Fuller, upheld Michigan's law, and more generally gave state legislatures plenary power over how they appointed their electors. The Court held that Art rdf:langString
rdf:langString McPherson v. Blacker
xsd:integer 60279590
xsd:integer 1123411914
rdf:langString unanimous
xsd:integer 13
xsd:integer 1
xsd:integer 146
xsd:gMonthDay --10-11
xsd:integer 1892
rdf:langString McPherson v. Blacker,
xsd:gMonthDay --10-17
xsd:integer 1892
rdf:langString The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution does not require state legislatures to appoint their electors in the Electoral College on the basis of the popular vote. State legislatures have "plenary" power to allocate their electors however they want.
rdf:langString McPherson v. Blacker
rdf:langString Fuller
rdf:langString McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1 (1892), was a United States Supreme Court case decided on October 17, 1892. The case concerned a law passed in Michigan which divided the state into separate congressional districts and awarded one of the state's electoral votes to the winner of each district. The suit was filed by several of these electors chosen in the 1892 election, including William McPherson, against , the Secretary of State of Michigan. It was the first Supreme Court case to consider whether certain methods of states' appointments of their electors were constitutional. The Court, in a majority opinion authored by Chief Justice Melville Fuller, upheld Michigan's law, and more generally gave state legislatures plenary power over how they appointed their electors. The Court held that Article Two of the United States Constitution also constrains the ability of each state to limit the ability of its state legislators to decide how to appoint their electors.
xsd:nonNegativeInteger 9539

data from the linked data cloud