# Geary v. Renne

> Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · July 24, 1989 · 880 F.2d 1062

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8972089

## Case

- **Full name:** Bob GEARY, Robert Silvestri, Dennis Mark, Melissa Gundrun, Wayne Johnson, David Soule, Max Woods, Peter Johnson, Robert Gebert, Election Action, Terence Faulkner, and Sudi Trippet v. Louise RENNE, San Francisco City Attorney, Dianne Feinstein, San Francisco Mayor, Board of Supervisors, City and County of San Francisco, City and County of San Francisco, and Jay Patterson, San Francisco Registrar of Voters
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- **Decided:** July 24, 1989
- **Citations:** 880 F.2d 1062; 1989 WL 80511
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Sneed
- **Judges:** Canby, Sneed, Trott
- **Cited by:** 8 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8972089

## Opinion text

SNEED, Circuit Judge,
concurring separately:
I concur in Judge Trott’s opinion.
I write only to comment on Judge Can-by’s discussion of Federalist No. 45. See infra at 1086 n. 3.
It has become fashionable to reject arguments based on principles of federalism rooted in the Tenth Amendment by referring to the Fourteenth Amendment. Presumably the reference is to that portion of the first section of the Amendment containing the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses as augmented by certain of the Bill of Rights. Perhaps I have missed something, but it is a fact that I have never read of the subject of nonpartisan elections being discussed by Congress in 1866 when it debated and passed the Fourteenth Amendment. More to the point, the context of these clauses has never been constant. That is not a criticism, only a statement reflecting the life of the law, yes, even constitutional law. Incorporation of portions of the Bill of Rights, for example, is a fairly recent development that perhaps may be, or already has been, extended to the Ninth Amendment. The content of the incorporated Bill of Rights also evolves over time.
In truth, when we, circuit judges, rely on the Fourteenth Amendment to curb the powers of a state, we are only relying on our perception of what the Supreme Court presently believes the Amendment requires. Judge Trott and I share a perception; Judge Canby has another. None of us has access to any stone tablets; yes, not even the Supreme Court.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8972089. Public record. Not legal advice.