Phoenix v. Kolodziejski

Phoenix v. Kolodziejski, 399 U.S. 204 (1970), was a voting rights case decided by the United States Supreme Court in 1970.

City of Phoenix v. Kolodziejski
Argued March 31, 1970
Decided June 23, 1970
Full case nameCity of Phoenix v. Emily Kolodziejski
Docket no.1066
Citations399 U.S. 204 (more)
90 S. Ct. 1990; 26 L. Ed. 2d 523
ArgumentOral argument
Case history
PriorInjunction granted, Kolodziejski v. City of Phoenix, 313 F. Supp. 209 (D. Ariz. 1969); probable jurisdiction noted, 397 U.S. 903 (1970)
Court membership
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices
Hugo Black · William O. Douglas
John M. Harlan II · William J. Brennan Jr.
Potter Stewart · Byron White
Thurgood Marshall · Harry Blackmun
Case opinions
MajorityWhite, joined by Douglas, Brennan, Marshall (in full); Black (in judgment and in Part I of the opinion of the Court)
DissentStewart, joined by Burger, Harlan
Blackmun took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

Facts

The City of Phoenix held an election in June 1969, in which the issuance of general obligation bonds to finance various municipal improvements was approved. Under Arizona law, only real property taxpayers were permitted to vote. Six days after the election, the U.S. Supreme Court held, in Cipriano v. City of Houma,[1] that restricting the franchise to property taxpayers in elections on revenue bonds violated the Equal Protection Clause. In August 1969, Emily Kolodziejski, who owned no realty, challenged the franchise restriction and attacked the validity of the June election. The District Court, finding no significant difference between revenue bonds and general obligation bonds, held the nonproperty owner exclusion unconstitutional.[2] It declared the June bond election invalid, since the authorization for the issuance of the bonds was not final on the date of the Cipriano decision.

Result

The Supreme Court unanimously affirmed, holding that the Equal Protection Clause prohibits states from restricting the franchise to real property taxpayers in elections to approve the issuance of general obligation bonds, as the differences between the interests of property owners and nonproperty owners are not sufficiently substantial to justify excluding the latter from voting.[3] The decision was held to apply only to authorizations for general obligation bonds that are not final as of the date of the decision.[4]

Justice Harry Blackmun took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

References
  1. Cipriano v. City of Houma, 395 U.S. 701 (1969).
  2. Kolodziejski v. City of Phoenix, 313 F. Supp. 209 (D. Ariz. 1969).
  3. Phoenix v. Kolodziejski, 399 U.S. 204, 207-13 (1970).
  4. Phoenix, 399 U.S. at 213-215.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.