purpose by prescribing limitations and duties for each branch that are essential to each branch’s independence and performance of assigned powers. . . . This court has stated: ‘It is axiomatic that no branch of government organized under a constitution may exercise any power that is not explicitly bestowed by that constitution or that is not essential to the exercise thereof.’ ” [Citations omitted.]); Adams v. Rubinow, supra, 157 Conn. 154 (“the legislative powers granted the General Assembly are complete except as restricted by the state or federal constitution, just as the judicial powers granted the judicial department are complete except as restricted by the state or federal constitution”); see also Rice v. Cayetano, 528 U.S. 495, 522, 120 S. Ct. 1044, 145 L. Ed. 2d 1007 (2000) (<HOLDING>); W. Horton, The Connecticut State
holding that substantial compliance with notice is sufficient recognizing that oath taken to honor state constitution makes it the justices duty to apply the state constitution when it does not conflict with the federal constitution holding that compliance with oneperson onevote requirement under fourteenth amendment of federal constitution does not excuse compliance with fifteenth amendment of federal constitution holding the exclusion did not violate the equal protection clause of the wyoming constitution or the fourteenth amendment to the united states constitution holding the fourteenth amendment does not apply to the actions of the federal government