Dillon v. Gloss, 256 U.S. 368 (1921), was a case in which the
Supreme Court of the United StatesThe Supreme Court of the United States is the highest judicial body in the United States, and leads the federal judiciary. It consists of the Chief Justice of the United States and eight Associate Justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed with the "advice and consent" of the Senate...
held that if the United States Congress—when proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States—desires to place a deadline on that particular constitutional amendment's ratification, that Congress may indeed do precisely that and further that Congress' selection of a seven-year time constraint upon the ratification of what later became the Constitution's
18th AmendmentAmendment XVIII of the United States Constitution, along with the Volstead Act , established Prohibition in the United States. Its ratification was certified on January 16, 1919...
was not deemed to be unreasonable by the Court.
The Justices did not rule that Congress
must impose a such deadline, merely that Congress
may do so if Congress so desires and that
Article V of the ConstitutionArticle Five of the United States Constitution describes the process whereby the Constitution may be altered. Such amendments may be proposed by the United States Congress or by a national convention assembled at the request of the legislatures of at least two-thirds of the several states...
is not violated by the imposition of such a time constraint.
Dillon had been arrested pursuant to the
National Prohibition ActThe Volstead Act, formally National Prohibition Act, which reinforced the prohibition of alcohol in the United States of America, was named for Andrew Volstead, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, which oversaw its passage. However, Volstead served as the legislation's sponsor and...
, title 2, § 3, and was in custody under § 26.
Dillon v. Gloss, 256 U.S. 368 (1921), was a case in which the
Supreme Court of the United StatesThe Supreme Court of the United States is the highest judicial body in the United States, and leads the federal judiciary. It consists of the Chief Justice of the United States and eight Associate Justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed with the "advice and consent" of the Senate...
held that if the United States Congress—when proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States—desires to place a deadline on that particular constitutional amendment's ratification, that Congress may indeed do precisely that and further that Congress' selection of a seven-year time constraint upon the ratification of what later became the Constitution's
18th AmendmentAmendment XVIII of the United States Constitution, along with the Volstead Act , established Prohibition in the United States. Its ratification was certified on January 16, 1919...
was not deemed to be unreasonable by the Court.
The Justices did not rule that Congress
must impose a such deadline, merely that Congress
may do so if Congress so desires and that
Article V of the ConstitutionArticle Five of the United States Constitution describes the process whereby the Constitution may be altered. Such amendments may be proposed by the United States Congress or by a national convention assembled at the request of the legislatures of at least two-thirds of the several states...
is not violated by the imposition of such a time constraint.
Background
Dillon had been arrested pursuant to the
National Prohibition ActThe Volstead Act, formally National Prohibition Act, which reinforced the prohibition of alcohol in the United States of America, was named for Andrew Volstead, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, which oversaw its passage. However, Volstead served as the legislation's sponsor and...
, title 2, § 3, and was in custody under § 26. He was denied his petition for a
writ of habeas corpusHabeas corpus is a legal action, or writ, through which a person can seek relief from the unlawful detention of him or herself, or of another person. It protects the individual from harming him or herself, or from being harmed by the judicial system...
, and appealed the denial. Dillon claimed that the Eighteenth Amendment was inoperative since it had not been ratified within the time frame set by the congressional resolution proposing the amendment. Dillon also claimed that the law was not in effect at the time the crime was committed, nor at the time of his arrest.
Opinion
First, proposal and ratification are not treated as unrelated acts but as succeeding steps in a single endeavor, the natural inference being that they are not to be widely separated in time. Secondly, it is only when there is deemed to be a necessity therefor that amendments are to be proposed, the reasonable implication being that when proposed they are to be considered and disposed of presently. Thirdly, as ratification is but the expression of the approbation of the people and is to be effective when had in three-fourths of the States, there is a fair implication that it must be sufficiently contemporaneous in that number of States to reflect the will of the people in all sections at relatively the same period, which of course ratification scattered through a long series of years would not do.
—Taken from majority opinion.
The majority also addressed Dillon's second claim. The court stated that the amendment was ratified on January 16, 1919, and went into effect one year later. Even though the
Secretary of StateThe United States Secretary of State is the head of the United States Department of State, concerned with foreign affairs. The Secretary is a member of the President's Cabinet and the highest-ranking cabinet secretary both in line of succession and order of precedence. The current Secretary of...
did not proclaim the ratification until January 29, 1919, only the date of the actual ratification mattered. The alleged crime and arrest took place on January 17, 1920, which meant that the amendment was in force at the time. The lower court's ruling was upheld.
See also
- Coleman v. Miller
Coleman v. Miller, is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court which clarified that if the Congress of the United States—when proposing for ratification an amendment to the United States Constitution pursuant to Article V thereof—chooses not to specify a deadline within...
- Equal Rights Amendment
The Equal Rights Amendment was a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution which was intended to guarantee that equal rights under any federal, state, or local law could not be denied on account of sex...
- List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 256
External links
256 U.S. 368 Full text of the opinion courtesy of Findlaw.com.