QUICK LINKS

The question of the ratification of the 16th Amendment involves certain changes made by some of the states in the wording of this amendment proposed by Congress. Many cases concerning this question are mentioned in this brief posted to this site. However, if you wish to just read and study some of the relevant cases which are posted to this site, the following links are provided:

Ashcroft v. Blunt, 696 S.W.2d 329 (Mo. banc 1985)

State v. Fridley, 126 Ariz. 419,616 P.2d 94, (Ariz.App. Div. 1 1980)

Watts v. Town of Homer, 207 So.2d 844 (La.App. 2 Cir. 1968)

King Lumber Co. v. Crow, 155 Ala. 504, 46 So. 646 (Ala. 1908)

Mayor and Aldermen of West End v. Simmons, 165 Ala. 359, 51 So. 638 (Ala. 1910)

Yancy v. Waddell, 139 Ala. 524, 36 So. 733 (Ala. 1904)

Board of Revenue of Jefferson County v. Crow, 141 Ala. 126,37 So. 469, (Ala. 1904)

Koehler v. Hill, 60 Iowa 543, 14 N.W. 738 (1883)

    Further, the Oklahoma Supreme Court has concluded in a series of cases that the question of the ratification of an amendment to the state constitution is an issue which it can decide:

State v. State Board of Equalization, 107 Okl. 118, 230 P. 743, 749 (1924): "The provisions of the Constitution for its own amendment are mandatory and binding, not only upon the Legislative Assembly, but also upon all the people as well; and, consequently, a failure to observe the mandates of the constitution is fatal to a proposed amendment, even though the electors have with practical unanimity voted for it."

See also:

In re Initiative Petition No. 2, 26 Okl. 548, 109 P. 823 (1910)

Ramsey v. Persinger, 43 Okl. 41, 141 P. 13 (1914)

Simpson v. Hill, 128 Okl. 269, 263 P. 635 (1927)

Looney v. Leeper, 145 Okl. 202, 292 P. 365 (1930)