| − | In '''''Cook v. Gralike''''', 531 U.S. 510 (2001), the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] invalidated under the [[U.S. Constitution]] a provision in the [[Missouri]] Constitution requiring indication on the ballot of whether congressional candidates declined to support a term limits amendment to the [[U.S. Constitution]]. Justice [[John Paul Stevens]], writing for the court, stated that this law was not a permissible exercise of the state's power to regulate the time, place, and manner of holding elections for [[federal]] offices. | + | In '''''Cook v. Gralike''''', 531 U.S. 510 (2001), the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] invalidated under the [[U.S. Constitution]] a provision in the [[Missouri]] Constitution requiring indication on the ballot of whether congressional candidates declined to support a term limits amendment to the [[U.S. Constitution]]. Justice [[John Paul Stevens]], writing for the court, stated that this law was not a permissible exercise of the state's power to regulate the time, place, and manner of holding elections for [[federal]] offices. ''See'' U.S. Const., Art., I, sec. 4, cl. 1. |
| − | This expanded the holding in ''[[U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton]]''. Surprisingly, Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] joined Justice Stevens majority opinion, but the other Justices who expressed different views in ''U.S. Term Limits'' continued to differ from Justice Stevens on the same or new grounds. | + | This applied the holding in ''[[U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton]]''. Perhaps surprisingly, Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] joined Justice Stevens majority opinion, but the other Justices who expressed different views in ''U.S. Term Limits'' continued to differ from Justice Stevens on the same or new grounds. |