The US Supremes need to mandate

The issue was, the right for the mayor to assemble and speak vs the states right to prohibit. He advocated, on his own time and money, for a lawful referendum

This conflict is very prone to misuse.  Are all rights of calizuela mayors so prohibited, or only political assemblies?  If Calizuela remains in the union, then the US Supremes need this case brought forth, it is fundamental to the union. If not, the misuse  from the large states creeps up, mixes with swamp sewage.

Consider the following.  A reasonable reform of government everywhere is to dump the county system,where a ton of corruption resides.   In a statewide referendum, the state would prohibit county politicians from defending on their own tim or money.  Would Calizuela make such a prohibition? No, they would be OKthe politicians were not crossing the union line, it is only union issue that the prohibition applies.  But, indeed, it is this misuse that the founders specifically reserved for the individual, especially politicians.

If the individual right is lost to state government, and Calizuela and Texa gains much larger House rule, then this kind of misuse will be very hard to stop, Congress too frightened to defend us with law.