We were then of the opinion and we now hold that where the performance of a duty prescribed by law depends on whether the statute or regulation is constitutional or invalid, there is no reason why the question may not be determined on a petition for a writ of mandamus under such circumstances as are present in this case. The reargument was heard by seven judges, one of whom was substituting for Judge Sybert, and in the order directing reargument, we limited the reargument to the constitutional questions raised by the petition. The initial argument was heard by five of the seven judges of this Court on both questions presented by the appeal: (i) whether mandamus is a proper action in which to test the constitutionality of the school board rule and (ii) whether the provisions of the regulation under attack violate a constitutional right of the petitioners. Arguments in this case were heard twice.This rule applies to a board intrusted with the management of public schools to compel them to discontinue the reading of the Bible in such schools. Where the performance of a duty prescribed by law depends on whether a statute or regulation is constitutional or invalid, the question may be determined on a petition for a writ of mandamus. MANDAMUS - Question Of Whether A Statute Or Regulation, Including A Rule Of A School Board, Is Constitutional May Be Determined In Petition For Writ Of.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |