DOCSLIB.ORG

IN the SUPREME COURT STATE of WYOMING KERRY and CLARA POWERS, on ) Behalf of Themselves and the Citizens ) of Wyoming, And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
IN the SUPREME COURT STATE of WYOMING KERRY and CLARA POWERS, on ) Behalf of Themselves and the Citizens ) of Wyoming, And 07/03/2013 IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF WYOMING KERRY AND CLARA POWERS, on ) behalf of themselves and the citizens ) of Wyoming, and CINDY HILL, on behalf ) of herself and as the SUPERINTENDENT ) OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, ) ) Appellants, ) ) v. ) No. S-13-0052 ) STATE OF WYOMING and ) Matthew H. Mead, Governor, in his official ) capacity, ) ) Appellees. ) BRIEF OF APPELLEES Angela C. Dougherty Gregory A. Phillips Dougherty Law Office, P.C. Wyoming Attorney General 1623 Central Avenue Cheyenne, WY 82003 Peter K. Michael (307) 432-4006 Chief Deputy Attorney General ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANTS John G. Knepper Senior Assistant Attorney General 123 Capitol Building Cheyenne, WY 82002 (307) 777-7841 ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CASES AND AUTHORITIES....................................................................... iv STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES ........................................................................................ 1 STATEMENT OF THE CASE ........................................................................................... 2 I. Nature of the Case ................................................................................................. 2 II. Course of Proceedings and Disposition Below ..................................................... 4 III. Statement of the Facts ............................................................................................ 4 A. The Origins of the Office of Superintendent and the Early Assignment of Duties to the Office by the Territorial and State Legislatures ........................... 5 B. Reform of the Office of Superintendent in the Early 20th Century ................ 10 C. Legislative Changes to the Office of Superintendent and the Development of the Department of Education in the Second Half of the 20th Century ........... 14 D. The Office of Superintendent Today ............................................................... 19 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ......................................................................................... 21 ARGUMENT ..................................................................................................................... 26 I. Standard of Review .............................................................................................. 26 II. The Wyoming Constitution does not imbue the office of Superintendent with pervasive, inherent power over education in Wyoming. ..................................... 30 A. The text of the Constitution expressly envisions that the Legislature will dictate the powers and duties of the Superintendent. ...................................... 30 1. The phrase “as prescribed by law” means that the Legislature can decide what powers and duties the Superintendent will exercise. ........................... 33 2. By its plain meaning, the first clause of Article 7, section 14 of the Constitution does not grant the Superintendent broad power over education in Wyoming. ................................................................................................. 38 i B. Wyoming’s constitutional debates show that the Framers thought the Superintendent’s authority would be provided by statute. .............................. 44 C. During the first twenty-five years after statehood, no Superintendent claimed to have been granted broad, inherent authority by the Constitution. .............. 48 D. The powers and duties that Superintendent Hill suggests are core powers of her office are recent grants of authority from the Legislature and not duties that Superintendents have historically exercised. ............................................ 49 E. Even were this Court to hold that the Constitution grants inherent authority to the office of Superintendent, the current statute preserves sufficient power so as to satisfy the Constitution............................................................................ 55 III. The Constitution’s guarantee that all power is inherent in the people and that they may alter their government does not prevent the Wyoming Legislature from using its authority to modify the powers of the Superintendent by statute. ........ 59 A. The Constitution specifically envisions that the Legislature can change the powers of the Superintendent by statute. ......................................................... 59 B. The Constitution does not require that the Legislature delay any changes to the powers of the Superintendent until after the incumbent leaves office. ........... 61 IV. The Constitution expressly grants to the Legislature the authority to create the powers and duties of the Superintendent and the exercise of this authority does not violate the division of powers guaranteed by article 2, section 1 of the Wyoming Constitution......................................................................................... 64 A. Separation of powers concerns cannot overcome the Constitution’s clear delegation of authority to the Legislature. ....................................................... 64 B. Superintendent Hill’s understanding of the division of responsibility for education in Wyoming is directly contrary to this Court’s recent opinions.... 65 V. The Wyoming Legislature has not passed an impermissible “special law.” ....... 69 A. The Education Act is a generally applicable statute, and it is constitutional under this Court’s prior decisions.................................................................... 69 B. This Court has explicitly rejected Superintendent Hill’s argument that the “special law” limitations in the Wyoming Constitution reduce the Legislature’s authority over education. ........................................................... 70 ii C. Superintendent Hill’s assertion that the Education Act is “personal” does not mean that the Legislature has enacted a “special law.” ................................... 71 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................. 73 iii TABLE OF CASES AND AUTHORITIES Cases Application of Okla. Capitol Imp. Auth., 958 P.2d 759 (Okla. 1998) ............................................................................................. 33 Atkinson v. State, Order, No. 09CVS006655 (N.C. Super. Ct. July 17, 2009) .......................................... 52 Baessler v. Freier, 2011 WY 125, 258 P.3d 720 (Wyo. 2011) .............................................................. 39, 72 Billis v. State, 800 P.2d 401 (Wyo. 1990) ............................................................................................. 27 Byington v. Fuller, 587 P.2d 636 (Wyo., 1978) ............................................................................................ 37 Campbell Cnty. Sch. Dist. v. State, 907 P.2d 1238 (Wyo. 1995) ..................................................................... 6, 16, 66, 67, 71 Campbell Cnty. Sch. Dist. v. State, 2008 WY 2, 181 P.3d 43 (Wyo. 2008) .......................................................................... 55 Cathcart v. Meyer, 2004 WY 49, 88 P.3d 1050 (Wyo. 2004) ................................................................ 26, 32 Dir. of the Office of State Lands and Invs. v. Merbanco, Inc., 2003 WY 73, 70 P.3d 241 (Wyo. 2003) ........................................................................ 28 Doles v. State, 994 P.2d 315 (Wyo. 1999) ............................................................................................... 4 Dworkin v. L.F.P., Inc., 839 P.2d 903 (Wyo. 1992) ................................................................................... 4, 29, 68 Fletcher v. Peck, 10 U.S. 87 (1810) ........................................................................................................... 37 iv Hamlin v. Transcon. Lines, 701 P.2d 1139 (Wyo. 1985) ........................................................................................... 42 Howard v. Cook, 83 P.2d 208 (Idaho 1938) .............................................................................................. 33 In re Guardianship of MEO, 2006 WY 87, 138 P.3d 1145 (Wyo. 2006) .................................................................... 57 Indep. Cmty. Bankers Ass’n of S.D. v. State ex. rel. Meierhenry, 346 N.W.2d 737 (S.D. 1984) ................................................................................... 60, 73 Krenning v. Heart Mountain Irrigation Dist., 2009 WY 11, 200 P.3d 774 (Wyo. 2009) ................................................................ 26, 30 Langer v. Totten, 175 N.W. 563 (N. Dak. 1919) ................................................................................. 30, 31 Leyen v. Dunn, 461 S.W.2d 41 (Tenn. App. 1970) ................................................................................. 60 Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803) ........................................................................................................... 37 Mariano & Associates, P.C. v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs of Sublette Cnty., 737 P.2d 323 (Wyo. 1987) ............................................................................................. 37 Mau v. Stoner, 14 Wyo. 183, 83 P. 218 (Wyo. 1905) ..................................................................... passim Miech v. Sheridan Cnty., 2002 WY 178, 59 P.3d 143 (Wyo. 2002) ........................................................................ 5 Pirie v. Kamps, 229 P.2d 927 (Wyo. 1951) ....................................................................................... 69, 70 Redco Const. v.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Wyoming Pre-Statehood Legal Materials: an Annotated Bibliography
    Wyoming Law Review Volume 7 Number 1 Article 2 January 2007 Wyoming Pre-Statehood Legal Materials: An Annotated Bibliography Debora A. Person Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.uwyo.edu/wlr Recommended Citation Person, Debora A. (2007) "Wyoming Pre-Statehood Legal Materials: An Annotated Bibliography," Wyoming Law Review: Vol. 7 : No. 1 , Article 2. Available at: https://scholarship.law.uwyo.edu/wlr/vol7/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Law Archive of Wyoming Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Wyoming Law Review by an authorized editor of Law Archive of Wyoming Scholarship. Person: Wyoming Pre-Statehood Legal Materials: An Annotated Bibliography WYOMING LAW REVIEW VOLUME 7 2007 NUMBER 1 Editor's Note The following bibliography is Part I of a two-part guide to the history and development ofWyoming law, compiled and annotated by University ofWyoming College of Law Associate Law Librarian Debora A. Person. Part I on Wyoming Pre-statehood Legal Materials contains both primary and selected secondary resources covering pre-Wyoming Territory, the administration of the Wyoming Territory, and the establishment of Wyoming as a state. This section was previ- ously published in 2005 in PrestatehoodLegal Materials: A Fifty-State Research Guide, Including New York City and the District of Columbia, edited by Michael Chiorazzi, J.D., M.L.L. and Marguerite Most, J.D., M.L.L. It is reprinted here with permission from Haworth Press, Inc. Part II of the annotated bibliography is forthcoming in Wyoming Law Review, Volume 7, Number 2, which will be published in summer, 2007.
    [Show full text]
  • State of Wyoming
    2018 18LSO-0490 TATE OF YOMING S W HOUSE BILL NO. HB0167 The Marriage and Constitution Restoration Act. Sponsored by: Representative(s) Lone and Edwards A BILL for 1 AN ACT relating to marriage and sexual orientation; 2 prohibiting any state action that treats sexual orientation 3 as a suspect class; prohibiting the state and its political 4 subdivisions from granting, endorsing, respecting or 5 recognizing any marriage not between a man and woman; 6 providing legislative findings; and providing for an 7 effective date. 8 9 Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming: 10 11 Section 1. 12 13 (a) The legislature finds that: 14 15 (i) Parody marriages and policies that endorse 16 parody marriages are nonsecular in nature for purposes of 1 HB0167 2018 STATE OF WYOMING 18LSO-0490 1 the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the 2 United States Constitution; 3 4 (ii) Marriages between a man and a woman and 5 policies that endorse marriages between a man and a women 6 are secular in nature for purposes of the Establishment 7 Clause of the First Amendment to the United States 8 Constitution; 9 10 (iii) Civilizations for millennia have defined 11 marriage as a union between a man and a woman; 12 13 (iv) Marriage between a man and a woman arose 14 out of the nature of things and is natural, neutral and 15 noncontroversial unlike parody marriages; 16 17 (v) The state of Wyoming has a duty under 18 article 6 of the United States Constitution to uphold the 19 United States Constitution; 20 21 (vi) The First Amendment applies to
    [Show full text]
  • The Uniform Enforcement of Support Act in Wyoming
    Wyoming Law Journal Volume 8 Number 3 Legal Problems Relating to Wyoming Article 10 Youth December 2019 The Uniform Enforcement of Support Act in Wyoming Roger McKenzie Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.uwyo.edu/wlj Recommended Citation Roger McKenzie, The Uniform Enforcement of Support Act in Wyoming, 8 WYO. L.J. 237 (1954) Available at: https://scholarship.law.uwyo.edu/wlj/vol8/iss3/10 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by Law Archive of Wyoming Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Wyoming Law Journal by an authorized editor of Law Archive of Wyoming Scholarship. NoTEs child whom (along with the wife) the husband refused to support, even though he was able to. The wife instituted a divorce proceeding in which she prayed for support money and custody of the child. The district court refused the divorce but retained the case in order to dispose of matters relating to the child. The court eventually awarded the custody of the child to the wife and ordered the father to pay $10 per month for the child's support. The Supreme Court, in upholding this action of the district court ,held that the lower court had the powers of a court of equity to determine the custody of the child; and that it also had jurisdiction, by virtue of Wyo. Comp. Stat. 1945, sec. 3-5919 (supra), to entertain a pro- ceeding by a wife to compel the husband to support the minor child when both husband and wife are separated. Here is a case where our Supreme Court approved an order for future support even though both spouses were still married.
    [Show full text]
  • Research Memo
    10/31/2005 Research Memo 05 RM 083 Date: October 31, 2005 Author: Joy N. Hill, Associate Research Analyst Re: Comparison of Wyoming and Other States’ Constitutional Prohibition Against Loans and Gifts to Individuals, Private Entities, etc. QUESTION 1. With respect to providing public assistance to individuals and private entities, do western states, particularly Arizona, have a Constitutional prohibition similar to Wyoming Constitution Article 16, Section 6? 2. What has Wyoming, or western states, done in an attempt to circumvent this prohibition? ANSWER 1. Most of the western states reviewed do have Constitutional prohibitions similar to Wyoming’s Article 16, Section 6, which states, in part: Neither the state nor any county, city, township, town, school district, or any other political subdivision, shall loan or give its credit or make donations to or in aid of any individual, association or corporation, except for necessary support of the poor...1 To begin, it would be helpful to provide a brief background on the creation of the Wyoming Constitution: Wyoming’s desire to come into statehood was exemplified by the fact that the framers of the Wyoming Constitution took only 25 days to write the document. The document was a compilation of provisions from various other state Constitutions, particularly from those states admitted to the union just prior to Wyoming. These states- North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Idaho, and Washington-were the states Wyoming framers borrowed most heavily from, but included Colorado’s Constitution as well.2 For purposes of this request, it is important to note that Arizona was not admitted to the union until 1912, whereas the above- referenced states were admitted prior to 1890, with Wyoming being admitted in that year.
    [Show full text]
  • IN the SUPREME COURT, STATE of WYOMING 2014 WY 15 OCTOBER TERM, A.D. 2013 January 28, 2014
    IN THE SUPREME COURT, STATE OF WYOMING 2014 WY 15 OCTOBER TERM, A.D. 2013 January 28, 2014 KERRY and CLARA POWERS, on behalf of themselves and the citizens of Wyoming, and CINDY HILL, on behalf of herself and as the SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, Appellants (Plaintiffs), No. S-13-0052 v. STATE OF WYOMING and MATTHEW H. MEAD, GOVERNOR, in his official capacity, Appellees (Defendants). W.R.A.P. 11 Certification from the District Court of Laramie County The Honorable Thomas T.C. Campbell, Judge Representing Appellants: Angela C. Dougherty, Dougherty Law Office, P.C., Cheyenne, Wyoming. Representing Appellees: Peter K. Michael, Attorney General; John G. Knepper, Senior Assistant Attorney General. Argument by Mr. Michael. Before KITE, C.J., VOIGT*, BURKE, DAVIS, JJ., and GOLDEN, J., Retired. BURKE, J., delivers the opinion of the Court; DAVIS, J., files a specially concurring opinion, in which VOIGT, J., joins; KITE, C.J., and GOLDEN, J., Retired, file a dissenting opinion. *Justice Voigt retired effective January 3, 2014. NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in Pacific Reporter Third. Readers are requested to notify the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Supreme Court Building, Cheyenne, Wyoming 82002, of any typographical or other formal errors so that correction may be made before final publication in the permanent volume. BURKE, Justice. [¶1] This matter comes before us as four certified questions from the district court for the First Judicial District of Wyoming. These questions ask us to determine whether Senate Enrolled Act 0001 violates the Wyoming Constitution. We conclude the Act unconstitutionally deprives the State Superintendent of Public Instruction of the power of “general supervision of the public schools” that is entrusted to the Superintendent in Article 7, Section 14 of the Wyoming Constitution.1 CERTIFIED QUESTIONS [¶2] The district court certified four questions to this Court.
    [Show full text]
  • Wyoming's Line Item Veto: Allowing the Governor to Legislate - Management Council of the Wyoming Legislature V
    Land & Water Law Review Volume 34 Issue 2 Article 7 1999 Constitutional Law - Wyoming's Line Item Veto: Allowing the Governor to Legislate - Management Council of the Wyoming Legislature v. Geringer Devon O'Connell Coleman Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.uwyo.edu/land_water Recommended Citation Coleman, Devon O'Connell (1999) "Constitutional Law - Wyoming's Line Item Veto: Allowing the Governor to Legislate - Management Council of the Wyoming Legislature v. Geringer," Land & Water Law Review: Vol. 34 : Iss. 2 , pp. 451 - 462. Available at: https://scholarship.law.uwyo.edu/land_water/vol34/iss2/7 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by Law Archive of Wyoming Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Land & Water Law Review by an authorized editor of Law Archive of Wyoming Scholarship. Coleman: Constitutional Law - Wyoming's Line Item Veto: Allowing the Gover Case Notes CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-Wyoming's Line Item Veto: Al- lowing the Governor to Legislate? Management Council of the Wyoming Legislature v. Geringer, 953 P.2d 839 (Wyo. 1998). INTRODUCTION On June 20, 1997, Wyoming Governor Jim Geringer vetoed portions of House Enrolled Act 2 (HEA 2) and set into motion a controversy over his line item veto power.' HEA 2 was the legislature's response to the Wyo- ming Supreme Court's ruling that the Wyoming public school finance sys- tem was unconstitutional.' The court had ordered the legislature to achieve constitutional compliance in the school funding system by July 1, 1997.' The Wyoming Constitution,
    [Show full text]
  • In the Supreme Court, State of Wyoming
    IN THE SUPREME COURT, STATE OF WYOMING 2001 WY 19 OCTOBER TERM, A.D. 2000 February 23, 2001 STATE OF WYOMING, et al., ) ) Appellants ) (Defendants), ) ) v. ) No. 00-120 ) CAMPBELL COUNTY SCHOOL ) DISTRICT, et al., ) ) Appellees ) (Plaintiffs). ) CAMPBELL COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, ) STATE OF WYOMING, et al., ) ) Appellants ) (Plaintiffs/ ) Intervening Plaintiffs), ) ) v. ) No. 00-121 ) STATE OF WYOMING, et al., ) ) Appellees ) (Defendants). ) BIG HORN COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT ) NO. ONE, STATE OF WYOMING, et al., ) ) Appellants ) (Intervening Defendants), ) ) v. ) No. 00-122 ) CAMPBELL COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, ) STATE OF WYOMING, et al., ) ) Appellees ) (Plaintiffs).) STATE OF WYOMING, et al., ) ) Appellants ) (Defendants),) ) v. ) No. 00-123 ) CAMPBELL COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, ) STATE OF WYOMING, et al., ) ) Appellees ) (Plaintiffs).) Appeals from the District Court of Laramie County The Honorable Nicholas G. Kalokathis, Judge Representing State of Wyoming, et al.: Rowena L. Heckert, Deputy Attorney General; Raymond B. Hunkins, Special Assistant Attorney General, of Jones, Jones, Vines & Hunkins, Wheatland, Wyoming; and Jack B. Speight, Robert T. McCue, and Dominique D. Y. Cone of Hathaway, Speight & Kunz, LLC, Cheyenne, Wyoming Representing Laramie County School District No. One: Paul J. Hickey and Richard D. Bush of Hickey, Mackey, Evans and Walker, Cheyenne, Wyoming Representing Natrona County School District No. One: Stuart R. Day and Kevin D. Huber of Williams, Porter, Day & Neville, P.C., Casper, Wyoming Representing Campbell County School District, Sweetwater County School District No. One, Sweetwater County School District No. Two, and Uinta County School District No. One: Ford T. Bussart and Marvin L. Tyler of Bussart, West, Piaia & Tyler, Rock Springs, Wyoming Representing Teton County School District No.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of the Provisions of the Constitution and Statutes of the Several States Relating to Pardons Ann Neal
    Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume 20 Article 6 Issue 3 November Fall 1929 Summary of the Provisions of the Constitution and Statutes of the Several States Relating to Pardons Ann Neal Beatrice Hager Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminology Commons, and the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons Recommended Citation Ann Neal, Beatrice Hager, Summary of the Provisions of the Constitution and Statutes of the Several States Relating to Pardons, 20 Am. Inst. Crim. L. & Criminology 364 (1929-1930) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology by an authorized editor of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. SUMMARY OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION AND STATUTES OF THE SEVERAL STATES RELAT- ING TO PARDONS COMPILED BY ANN NEAL AND BEATRICE HAGER' I. SUMMARY A. STATUS OF PARDON BOARDS IN THE SEVERAL STATES 1. States in which there are pardon boards: Alabama, Arizona, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Idaho, Illi- nois, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Ten- nessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont and Wyoming-29. 2. States in which pardon boards are provided for in the Constitution: Alabama, Delaware, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mon- tana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota and Utah-15. 3. States in which pardon boards are created by statute: Arizona, California, Connecticut, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Missouri, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont and Wyoming-14.
    [Show full text]
  • Colonists, Citizens, Constitutions: Creating the American Republic February 28 – May 31, 2020
    Colonists, Citizens, Constitutions: Creating the American Republic February 28 – May 31, 2020 Selected PR Images America has been singular among nations in fostering a vibrant culture of engagement with constitutional matters and the fundamental principles of government. Featuring more than 40 books and documents from the Dorothy Tapper Goldman Foundation’s collection, Colonists, Citizens, Constitutions: Creating the American Republic illuminates America’s continuing debates on the role and limits of government and the fundamental rights of all citizens. From the early days of the American Revolution, to the American Civil War, to the eve of World War I, the rare and early printings of state and federal constitutions trace defining moments in American history and are testaments to our nation’s continuing experiment in self-government and the relentless quest for improvement. Virginia Declaration of Rights of 1776 The Proceedings of the Convention of Delegates, Held at the Capitol, in the City of Williamsburg, in the Colony of Virginia [. .] Williamsburg: Alexander Purdie, [1776] Photo credit: Ardon Bar-Hama In June 1776, before they drafted a constitution for their independent state, Virginians adopted a Declaration of Rights that announced the fundamental principles that would guide their new government. The declaration also listed many—but not necessarily all—of the basic rights citizens would enjoy. New York Constitution of 1777 The Constitution of the State of New-York Fish-Kill: Samuel Loudon, 1777 Photo credit: Ardon Bar-Hama Early state constitutions made governors weak and tasked them merely with executing the will of the people’s representatives in the legislature. New York’s 1777 constitution marked a shift in American thinking by calling for a governor directly elected by voters who would have the ability—as part of a committee—to exercise a qualified veto over proposed laws.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparison of Statewide Processes
    Comparison of Statewide Initiative Processes 1 Definitions / Availability Anything that appears on the ballot other than a candidate for office is called a ballot measure. Ballot measures are broken down into two distinct categories – initiatives and referendums. Initiatives are when the citizens, collecting signatures on a petition, place advisory questions, memorials, statutes or constitutional amendments on the ballot for the citizens to adopt or reject. Twenty-four states have the initiative process (see table below). Of the 24 states, 18 have the constitutional initiative process which is further broken down into two distinct subcategories - direct initiative amendments (DA) and indirect initiative amendments (IDA). A direct initiative amendment (DA) is when a constitutional amendment is proposed by the people and is placed directly on the ballot for voter approval or rejection. An indirect initiative amendment (IDA) is when a constitutional amendment is proposed by the people but must first be submitted to the state legislature for consideration before the amendment can be placed on the ballot for voter approval or rejection. Sixteen of the 18 states have the direct initiative amendment process and two have the indirect initiative amendment process. Twenty-one of the 24 initiative states have the statutory initiative process which is further broken down into two distinct subcategories - direct initiative statutes (DS) and indirect initiative statutes (IDS). A direct initiative statute (DS) is when statutes (laws) or memorials (non-biding laws) proposed by the people are directly placed on the ballot for voter approval or rejection. An indirect Initiative statute (IDS) is when statutes (laws) or memorials (non-biding laws) proposed by the people must first be submitted to the state legislature for consideration before they can be placed on the ballot for voter approval or rejection.
    [Show full text]
  • Independent Interpretation of the Wyoming Constitution's Declaration
    Wyoming Law Review Volume 20 Number 2 Article 3 2020 Independent Interpretation of the Wyoming Constitution’s Declaration of Rights: A More Open and Traditional Approach to Asserting Rights Nathan Yanchek University of Wyoming College of Law Student Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.uwyo.edu/wlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Yanchek, Nathan (2020) "Independent Interpretation of the Wyoming Constitution’s Declaration of Rights: A More Open and Traditional Approach to Asserting Rights," Wyoming Law Review: Vol. 20 : No. 2 , Article 3. Available at: https://scholarship.law.uwyo.edu/wlr/vol20/iss2/3 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the UW College of Law Reviews at Law Archive of Wyoming Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Wyoming Law Review by an authorized editor of Law Archive of Wyoming Scholarship. Yanchek: Independent Interpretation COMMENT Independent Interpretation of the Wyoming Constitution’s Declaration of Rights: A More Open and Traditional Approach to Asserting Rights Nathan Yanchek* The legislation now before us would probably not cause more than ordinary anxiety, or deserve greater consideration than the ordinary constitutional question, were it not for the times in which we live, the depression now existing, the unrest now prevailing, the mass of social legislation in the last few years, the wonder whither we are going, and the frequent queries whether courts are drifting merely with the tide or are rendering their decisions with that steadfast judgment as is their wont.1 I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................396 II. THE RESURGENT INTEREST IN STATE CONSTITUTIONS AND INDEPENDENT STATE CONSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS ......................................398 III.
    [Show full text]
  • Wyoming's Administrative Regulation Review Act
    Land & Water Law Review Volume 14 Issue 1 Article 6 1979 Wyoming's Administrative Regulation Review Act Barton R. Voigt Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.uwyo.edu/land_water Recommended Citation Voigt, Barton R. (1979) "Wyoming's Administrative Regulation Review Act," Land & Water Law Review: Vol. 14 : Iss. 1 , pp. 189 - 206. Available at: https://scholarship.law.uwyo.edu/land_water/vol14/iss1/6 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by Law Archive of Wyoming Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Land & Water Law Review by an authorized editor of Law Archive of Wyoming Scholarship. Voigt: Wyoming's Administrative Regulation Review Act COMMENTS WYOMING'S ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATION REVIEW ACT The increasing practice of legislative delegation of rulemaking authority to administrative agencies has, in turn, heightened interest in the concept of legislative over- sight.' The Wyoming State Legislature joined this trend in 1977, with the passage of the Administrative Regulation Review Act (ARRA).2 The ARRA provides for ad- ministrative agency3 accountability within a framework of legislative and executive review. Unfortunately, the Act was poorly drafted, leaving substantial questions as to its operative effect. Further, the constitutionality of some of the Act's basic features is uncertain. The purposes of this Com- ment are to analyze the review process established by the ARRA, and to address the constitutional issues involved. THE REVIEW PROCESS Under Wyoming's Administrative Procedure Act (APA), rulemaking has been a relatively unilateral agency function.4 Specified statutory requirements had to be met, of course, and judicial review was available, but the delegated authority was largely unsupervised.
    [Show full text]