Cook v. Gralike
| Cook v. Gralike | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Supreme Court of the United States |
||||||
| Argued November 6, 2000 Decided February 28, 2001 |
||||||
| Full case name | Rebecca McDowell Cook v. Donald J. Gralike and Mike Harman | |||||
| Citations | 531 U.S. 510 (more)
121 S. Ct. 1029; 149 L. Ed. 2d 44; 2001 U.S. LEXIS 1953; 69 U.S.L.W. 4150; 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Service 1615; 2001 Daily Journal DAR 2089; 2001 Colo. J. C.A.R. 1068; 14 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 119
|
|||||
| Court membership | ||||||
|
||||||
| Case opinions | ||||||
| Majority | Stevens, joined by Scalia, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer; Souter (parts I, II, IV); Thomas (parts I, IV) | |||||
| Concurrence | Kennedy | |||||
| Concurrence | Thomas | |||||
| Concurrence | Rehnquist, joined by O'Connor | |||||
Cook v. Gralike, 531 U.S. 510 (2001), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that an attempt by the state of Missouri to influence Congressional elections in favor of candidates that supported term limits was unconstitutional.[1]
Opinion of the Court
A state constitutional amendment adopted by Missouri voters would affix to ballots in primary general elections warnings to votes if the candidate did not support term limits. The Court held that the powers delegated to the states by the Elections Clause related only to the power over the procedural mechanisms of elections. Because this amendment sought to influence the outcome of elections, it exceeded state powers over national elections.[2]
