14

5

Coleman v Miller
There are two things that decide law cases
(1) Cases which pick up element of desirability and (2)
Those cases squaring technically with the law. Ideal
is to have desiarable cases that do fit the
law.
Objection to case: Here do not have a proper
plaintiff: Court here says in effect. There is
still constitutional issue involved but you have
a different forum ie — the political
departments. Court did not pass on question
whether if state once fails to ratify it
can later change the mind and ratify.
NB. Text: The supreme court has never passed
on the question of whether such power exists. Whether
a state can reject and then ratify has been
decided by two state courts which reached
opposite conclusions. The Supreme Ct of Kansas
held that while ratification is final the
rejection of a proposed amendment has no such
finality. The Kentucky court held that
state can act but once on a proposed
amendment thereby exhausting its power.
If the issue is ever taken before the Supreme
Court the decision will probably be that
Article V does not prevent one legislature
to reverse the action of a prior legislature
in performing the federal function of passing
on a proposed amendment as long as the
proposed amendment has not yet been completely