Open Housing: Submission of Legis- Latively Approved Act to Referen- Dum Held Not Enjoinable

In Spaulding v. Blair' the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit determined that the mere submission to state-wide referendum of a proposed open-housing act for final approval by the voters, under the procedure outlined in Article XVI of the Maryland Constitution, was not a violation of fourteenth amendment rights and could not be enjoined. During its 1967 session the Maryland General Assembly passed, and the Governor approved, the state's first open-housing enactment, known as Chapter 385, to take effect on June 1, 1967.2 The Maryland Constitution provides that upon the filing of appropriate petitions with the Secretary of State "any law or part of a law capable of referendum" passed by the legislature must be presented to the people for approval or rejection at the polls.' When valid petitions4 were duly filed requesting submission of Chapter 385 to a referendum on November 5, 1968, a group of Negro citizens brought a class action against the Secretary of State and various election officials for declaratory and injunctive relief to prevent placing the referendum on the ballot. Conceding the constitutionality of Chapter 385, the plaintiffs alleged that the submission of the proposed law to the electorate for approval or rejection would violate their privileges and immunities and deprive them of equal protection of the law. The defendants moved for dismissal, asserting that the case was not ripe and that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The district court found that a justiciable controversy did exist since the theory of plaintiffs' suit was that mere submission of Chapter 385 to referendum was constitutionally forbidden.' However, the court dismissed for failure to state a meritorious claim, and the court of appeals affirmed.