stating that “determining the meaning of the [state] Constitution, which is binding on everyone, was the exclusive function of the courts”
How later courts described this case
- stating that “determining the meaning of the [state] Constitution, which is binding on everyone, was the exclusive function of the courts”
- observing that a rule that precludes a court from revisiting a previous construction is "stated more strongly than we would be willing to put it"
- courts had jurisdiction to decide legitimacy of procedure employed by General Assembly to select successor to Governor-elect, who had died before taking office
- Georgia courts have the exclusive function of interpreting the state constitution
Written by the judges who cited it.
Later courts went against this
Disapproved in part by Blackmon v. Golia, 231 Ga. 381 (1973)
only such power as the people have conferred upon them by the Constitution” and that "a fundamental principle of our State Government under the Constitution ... denies any implied or inherent right or power in the legislative department to exercise any power that has not by the sovereign people, through that Constitution, been reposed in the legislative department of government” which appear in Thompson v. Talmadge,…
The opinion
Candler, Justice,
dissenting. In my view the cases do not present justiciable controversies. It is my opinion that they involve questions over which the General Assembly has been given exclusive jurisdiction, and whether it has acted correctly or incorrectly, the courts are given no power under the Constitution to interfere.