The Supreme Court on Tuesday addressed a heated dispute over gubernatorial and presidential assent to state bills, as Kerala and Tamil Nadu opposed President Droupadi Murmu’s May reference questioning the court’s April ruling. The ruling mandated governors not to reserve bills for the President if consent was initially withheld and set a three-month deadline for presidential assent. A five-judge bench led by Chief Justice BR Gavai overruled the states’ objections but scheduled a full hearing for August, directing responses within a week.

Kerala’s Left Democratic Front and Tamil Nadu’s DMK fiercely contested the reference, with Tamil Nadu CM MK Stalin condemning it as an attempt to undermine state governments. The President’s 14 questions, filed under Article 143, queried the judiciary’s authority to set deadlines and interfere with governors’ discretion. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, dismissed the states’ challenges, controversially likening them to “repeated proposals to a girl.”

The issue stems from earlier clashes, notably Tamil Nadu’s 10 bills passed in April after Governor RN Ravi’s refusal was deemed “arbitrary” by the Supreme Court. Senior advocates KK Venugopal and P Wilson, for Kerala and Tamil Nadu, argued the reference’s impact, with the court noting its nationwide implications.

Also Read: SC Exposes Samajwadi Party’s Rs 115 Office Scandal

Also Read: “This judgment should serve as a lesson” Tejasvi Slams Karnataka Govt