In 1919, the United States Congress proposed a Constitutional amendment reading: "Section 1: The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex." "Section 2: Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation." By July 1920, thirty-five states had ratified the proposal, with only one additional state needed for the Amendment to be adopted.
In February, the Court announced a unanimous decision authored by Associate Justice Louis Brandeis, concluding that Fairchild, as a private citizen, lacked standing to challenge the amendment's ratification under the limitations of the Case or Controversy Clause of Article III.[1][6] On the same day, the Court also decided a companion case, Leser v. Garnett which upheld the Amendment's ratification process on the merits.
The Fairchild decision marked a departure from prior doctrine, which had allowed any citizen to sue to preserve a public right.[7]
Subsequent developmentsedit
This case is often seen as one of two cases, along with Frothingham v. Mellon, that became the genesis of the doctrine of legal standing. However, the term standing was not associated with Article III until the New Deal era.[8][9]
^Vile, John R. (May 1, 2003). Encyclopedia of Constitutional Amendments, Proposed Amendments, and Amending Issues: 1789-2002. ABC-CLIO. pp. 184–. ISBN9781851094288. Retrieved December 13, 2012.
^ abBradeis, Louis D. (June 30, 1978). Letters of Louis D. Brandeis: 1921-1941, Elder statesman: 1921-1941. SUNY Press. pp. 47–. ISBN9780873953306. Retrieved December 13, 2012.
^Renstrom, Peter G. (2003). The Taft Court: Justices, Rulings, and Legacy. ABC-CLIO. pp. 111–. ISBN9781576072806. Retrieved December 13, 2012.
^McGovney, Dudley Odell; Howard, Pendleton (1955). Cases on constitutional law. Bobbs-Merrill. p. 71. Retrieved December 13, 2012.
^ abWroth, Lawrence Counselman (1921). The Johns Hopkins Alumni Magazine: Published in the Interest of the University and the Alumni. The Johns Hopkins Alumni Association. p. 20. Retrieved December 13, 2012.
^The Metaphor of Standing and the Problem of Self-Governance, by Steven L. Winter, 40 Stan. L. Rev. 1371, July, 1988.
^Stearns, Maxwell L. (May 1, 2002). Constitutional Process: A Social Choice Analysis of Supreme Court Decision Making. University of Michigan Press. pp. 385–. ISBN9780472088683. Retrieved December 13, 2012.
^"Who May Test the Constitutionality of a Statute in the Supreme Court". Harvard Law Review. 47 (4): 678. February 1934. doi:10.2307/1331986. JSTOR 1331986.
External linksedit
Text of Fairchild v. Hughes, 258U.S. 126 (1922) is available from:CourtListenerFindlawGoogle ScholarJustiaLibrary of CongressOpenJurist
January 01, 1970
fairchild, hughes, 1922, case, which, supreme, court, united, states, held, that, general, citizen, state, that, already, women, suffrage, lacked, standing, challenge, validity, ratification, nineteenth, amendment, companion, case, leser, garnett, upheld, rati. Fairchild v Hughes 258 U S 126 1922 was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that a general citizen in a state that already had women s suffrage lacked standing to challenge the validity of the ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment 1 A companion case Leser v Garnett upheld the ratification 2 3 4 Fairchild v HughesSupreme Court of the United StatesArgued January 23 January 24 1922Decided February 27 1922Full case nameOscar Leser et al v Garnett et al Citations258 U S 126 more 42 S Ct 274 66 L Ed 499 1922 U S LEXIS 2249Court membershipChief Justice William H Taft Associate Justices Joseph McKenna Oliver W Holmes Jr William R Day Willis Van DevanterMahlon Pitney James C McReynoldsLouis Brandeis John H ClarkeCase opinionMajorityBrandeis joined by unanimousLaws appliedCase or Controversy Clause U S Const Art III Contents 1 Background 2 Opinion of the Court 3 Subsequent developments 4 See also 5 References 6 External linksBackground editIn 1919 the United States Congress proposed a Constitutional amendment reading Section 1 The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex Section 2 Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation By July 1920 thirty five states had ratified the proposal with only one additional state needed for the Amendment to be adopted nbsp Charles S Fairchild challenged the validity of what was to become the 19th Amendment On July 7 1920 Charles S Fairchild challenged the validity of the ratification process for that Amendment in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia The challenge sought to prevent Secretary of State Charles Evans Hughes from officially declaring the Amendment valid The district court dismissed the case on July 20 and Fairchild appealed to the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia On August 26 Hughes acknowledged Tennessee s ratification and the Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution became law The Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court decision The case was appealed to the Supreme Court 3 5 In November 1921 the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case which was argued in January 1922 6 Opinion of the Court edit nbsp Louis Brandeis penned the Court s opinion In February the Court announced a unanimous decision authored by Associate Justice Louis Brandeis concluding that Fairchild as a private citizen lacked standing to challenge the amendment s ratification under the limitations of the Case or Controversy Clause of Article III 1 6 On the same day the Court also decided a companion case Leser v Garnett which upheld the Amendment s ratification process on the merits The Fairchild decision marked a departure from prior doctrine which had allowed any citizen to sue to preserve a public right 7 Subsequent developments editThis case is often seen as one of two cases along with Frothingham v Mellon that became the genesis of the doctrine of legal standing However the term standing was not associated with Article III until the New Deal era 8 9 See also editList of United States Supreme Court cases volume 258References edit a b Fairchild v Hughes 258 U S 126 1922 Vile John R May 1 2003 Encyclopedia of Constitutional Amendments Proposed Amendments and Amending Issues 1789 2002 ABC CLIO pp 184 ISBN 9781851094288 Retrieved December 13 2012 a b Bradeis Louis D June 30 1978 Letters of Louis D Brandeis 1921 1941 Elder statesman 1921 1941 SUNY Press pp 47 ISBN 9780873953306 Retrieved December 13 2012 Renstrom Peter G 2003 The Taft Court Justices Rulings and Legacy ABC CLIO pp 111 ISBN 9781576072806 Retrieved December 13 2012 McGovney Dudley Odell Howard Pendleton 1955 Cases on constitutional law Bobbs Merrill p 71 Retrieved December 13 2012 a b Wroth Lawrence Counselman 1921 The Johns Hopkins Alumni Magazine Published in the Interest of the University and the Alumni The Johns Hopkins Alumni Association p 20 Retrieved December 13 2012 The Metaphor of Standing and the Problem of Self Governance by Steven L Winter 40 Stan L Rev 1371 July 1988 Stearns Maxwell L May 1 2002 Constitutional Process A Social Choice Analysis of Supreme Court Decision Making University of Michigan Press pp 385 ISBN 9780472088683 Retrieved December 13 2012 Who May Test the Constitutionality of a Statute in the Supreme Court Harvard Law Review 47 4 678 February 1934 doi 10 2307 1331986 JSTOR 1331986 External links editText of Fairchild v Hughes 258 U S 126 1922 is available from CourtListener Findlaw Google Scholar Justia Library of Congress OpenJurist Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Fairchild v Hughes amp oldid 1175142136, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,
