HILL, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS, ET AL.
v.
PRINTING INDUSTRIES OF THE GULF COAST ET AL.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Texas Attorney General Hill and others challenged the constitutionality of a Texas election code provision governing political fund reporting and disclosure. The Supreme Court vacated the District Court's judgment and remanded the case for reconsideration because Texas had enacted a new Political Funds Reporting and Disclosure Act that substantially amended the challenged provision, potentially mooting the dispute.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Per Curiam.
The parties to this case have informed us that the State of Texas has enacted the Political Funds Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1975, which will become effective on September 1, 1975.† Section 11 of that Act substantially amends Art. 14.10 (b) (Supp. 1974-1975) of the Texas Election Code, the constitutionality of which is at issue in this appeal. Although the parties take the position that these amendments do not affect this case, we prefer to remand the case to the District Court for reconsideration in light of the recent amendments, rather “than render an unnecessary judgment on the validity of the constitutional views expressed by the District Court.” White v. Regester, ante, p. 935.
The judgment of the District Court is vacated. The case is remanded to that court for reconsideration in light of the new legislation and for dismissal if the case is or becomes moot.
So ordered.
Mr. Justice Douglas took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
†
Tex. Const., Art. 3, § 39.