involving a constitutional provision
How later courts described this case
- involving a constitutional provision
- term freeholder struck from state constitutional provision leaving the rest intact
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
BILLINGS, Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I agree with the principal opinion’s reasons and conclusion that the “freeholder” provision of the Missouri Constitution violates the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. I cannot agree that the unconstitutional provision can properly be severed from the section so as to permit the appointment of a new Board. In my view, the “freeholder” requirement taints the entire section. Neither can I agree *86 that the petition for declaratory judgment can be construed to permit the appointment of a new Board.
I would reverse the case with directions to enter a judgment for appellants.