Texas Constitution:Article I, Section 3: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Texas Constitution:Article I, Section 3 (view source)

Revision as of 14:28, July 20, 2023

12 bytes removed ,  July 20, 2023
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 17: Line 17:
The first Massachusetts Declaration of Rights was adopted in 1780. The first section read: "All men are born free and equal, and have certain natural, essential, and unalienable rights; among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties; that of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property; in fine, that of seeking and obtaining their safety and happiness." And the sixth read: "No man nor corporation or association of men have any other title to obtain advantages, or particular and exclusive privileges distinct from those of the community, than what rises from the consideration of services rendered to the public, and this title being in nature neither hereditary nor transmissible to children or descendants or relations by blood; the idea of a man born a magistrate, lawgiver, or judge is absurd and unnatural."
The first Massachusetts Declaration of Rights was adopted in 1780. The first section read: "All men are born free and equal, and have certain natural, essential, and unalienable rights; among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties; that of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property; in fine, that of seeking and obtaining their safety and happiness." And the sixth read: "No man nor corporation or association of men have any other title to obtain advantages, or particular and exclusive privileges distinct from those of the community, than what rises from the consideration of services rendered to the public, and this title being in nature neither hereditary nor transmissible to children or descendants or relations by blood; the idea of a man born a magistrate, lawgiver, or judge is absurd and unnatural."


The first Kentucky Declaration of Rights was adopted in 1792. The first section read: "[A]ll men, when they form a social compact, are equal, and [] no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive, separate public emoluments or privileges from the community, but in consideration of public services." And the twenty-sixth read in part: "[T]he Legislature shall not grant any title of nobility or hereditary distinction."
The first Kentucky Declaration of Rights was adopted in 1792. The first section read: "[A]ll men, when they form a social compact, are equal, and [] no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive separate public emoluments or privileges from the community, but in consideration of public services." And the twenty-sixth read in part: "[T]he Legislature shall not grant any title of nobility or hereditary distinction."


The second Kentucky Declaration of Rights was adopted in 1799. The first section read: "[A]ll freemen, when they form a social compact, are equal, and [] no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive, separate public emoluments or privileges from the community, but in consideration of public services." And the twenty-sixth read in part: "[T]he Legislature shall not grant any title of nobility or hereditary distinction."
The second Kentucky Declaration of Rights was adopted in 1799. The first section read: "[A]ll freemen, when they form a social compact, are equal, and [] no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive separate public emoluments or privileges from the community, but in consideration of public services." And the twenty-sixth read in part: "[T]he Legislature shall not grant any title of nobility or hereditary distinction."


The first Mississippi Declaration of Rights was adopted in 1817. The first section read: "[A]ll freemen, when they form a social compact, are equal in rights, and [] no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive, separate, public emoluments or privileges, from the community, but in consideration of public services." And the twenty-sixth read: "[N]o hereditary emoluments, privileges, or honors shall ever be granted or conferred in this State."
The first Mississippi Declaration of Rights was adopted in 1817. The first section read: "[A]ll freemen, when they form a social compact, are equal in rights, and [] no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive separate public emoluments or privileges from the community, but in consideration of public services." And the twenty-sixth read: "[N]o hereditary emoluments, privileges, or honors shall ever be granted or conferred in this State."


The first Connecticut Declaration of Rights was adopted in 1818. The first section read: "[A]ll men, when they form a social compact, are equal in rights; and [] no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the community." And the twentieth read: "No hereditary emoluments, privileges or honors, shall ever be granted, or conferred in this State."
The first Connecticut Declaration of Rights was adopted in 1818. The first section read: "[A]ll men, when they form a social compact, are equal in rights; and [] no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the community." And the twentieth read: "No hereditary emoluments, privileges or honors, shall ever be granted, or conferred in this State."


The first Alabama Declaration of Rights was adopted in 1819. The first section read: "[A]ll freemen, when they form a social compact, are equal in rights; and [] no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive, separate public emoluments or privileges, but in consideration of public services." And the twenty-sixth read in part: "No title of nobility, or hereditary distinction, privilege, honor, or emolument, shall ever be granted or conferred in this State."
The first Alabama Declaration of Rights was adopted in 1819. The first section read: "[A]ll freemen, when they form a social compact, are equal in rights; and [] no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive separate public emoluments or privileges, but in consideration of public services." And the twenty-sixth read in part: "No title of nobility, or hereditary distinction, privilege, honor, or emolument, shall ever be granted or conferred in this State."


The Declaration of Rights of the Republic of Texas was adopted in 1836. The first section read: "All men, when they form a social compact, have equal rights, and no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive public privileges or emoluments from the community." And the eighth read in part: "No title of nobility, hereditary privileges or honors, shall ever be granted or conferred in this Republic."
The Declaration of Rights of the Republic of Texas was adopted in 1836. The first section read: "All men, when they form a social compact, have equal rights, and no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive public privileges or emoluments from the community." And the eighth read in part: "No title of nobility, hereditary privileges or honors, shall ever be granted or conferred in this Republic."
Line 31: Line 31:
In ''Jackson v. Bulloch'', 12 Conn. 38, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/Conn_38.pdf#page=5 42-43] (1837), the Connecticut Supreme Court opined: "The bill of rights, in its 1st section, declares, that all men, when they form a social compact, are equal in rights; and that no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the community. The language is certainly broad; but not as broad as that of the bill of rights in Massachusetts, to which it has been compared. It seems evidently to be limited to those who are parties to the social compact thus formed. Slaves cannot be said to be parties to that compact, or to be represented in it."
In ''Jackson v. Bulloch'', 12 Conn. 38, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/Conn_38.pdf#page=5 42-43] (1837), the Connecticut Supreme Court opined: "The bill of rights, in its 1st section, declares, that all men, when they form a social compact, are equal in rights; and that no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the community. The language is certainly broad; but not as broad as that of the bill of rights in Massachusetts, to which it has been compared. It seems evidently to be limited to those who are parties to the social compact thus formed. Slaves cannot be said to be parties to that compact, or to be represented in it."


The State of Texas's first Bill of Rights was adopted in 1845. The second section read: "All freemen, when they form a social compact, have equal rights; and no man, or set of men, is entitled to exclusive, separate, public emoluments or privileges, but in consideration of public services." Note that no section directly addressed titles of nobility or hereditary emoluments, privileges or honors.
The State of Texas's first Bill of Rights was adopted in 1845. The second section read: "All freemen, when they form a social compact, have equal rights; and no man, or set of men, is entitled to exclusive separate public emoluments or privileges, but in consideration of public services." Note that no section directly addressed titles of nobility or hereditary emoluments, privileges or honors.


In ''Williams v. Cammack'', 27 Miss. 209, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/Miss_209.pdf#page=10 218] (1854), the Mississippi Supreme Court opined: "The principle here announced is that of equality in political rights, and a denial of all title to individual privileges, honors, and distinctions from the community but for public services. It was directed against superiority of personal and political rights . . . . But it has no reference to the private relations of the citizens, nor to the action of the legislature in passing laws regulating the domestic policy and business affairs of the people, or any portion of them. Such matters are left, with but few limitations, to the discretion of the legislature."
In ''Williams v. Cammack'', 27 Miss. 209, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/Miss_209.pdf#page=10 218] (1854), the Mississippi Supreme Court opined: "The principle here announced is that of equality in political rights, and a denial of all title to individual privileges, honors, and distinctions from the community but for public services. It was directed against superiority of personal and political rights . . . . But it has no reference to the private relations of the citizens, nor to the action of the legislature in passing laws regulating the domestic policy and business affairs of the people, or any portion of them. Such matters are left, with but few limitations, to the discretion of the legislature."
Line 37: Line 37:
In the State of Texas's second Bill of Rights adopted in 1861 due to it joining the Confederacy and its third Bill of Rights adopted in 1866 due to it leaving the Confederacy, the relevant constitutional language remained exactly the same.
In the State of Texas's second Bill of Rights adopted in 1861 due to it joining the Confederacy and its third Bill of Rights adopted in 1866 due to it leaving the Confederacy, the relevant constitutional language remained exactly the same.


The State of Texas's fourth Bill of Rights was adopted in 1869 due to the demands of Congressional Reconstruction. The second section read: "All freemen, when they form a social compact, have equal rights; and no man, or set of men, is entitled to exclusive separate public emoluments or privileges." And the twenty-first read: "The equality of all persons before the law is herein recognized, and shall ever remain inviolate; nor shall any citizen ever be deprived of any right, privilege, or immunity, nor be exempted from any burden, or duty, on account of race, color, or previous condition."
The State of Texas's fourth Bill of Rights was adopted in 1869 due to the demands of Congressional Reconstruction. The second section read: "All freemen, when they form a social compact, have equal rights; and no man, or set of men, is entitled to exclusive separate public emoluments or privileges." And the twenty-first read: "The equality of all persons before the law is herein recognized and shall ever remain inviolate; nor shall any citizen ever be deprived of any right, privilege or immunity, nor be exempted from any burden or duty, on account of race, color or previous condition."


Without any recorded debate, section twenty-one was dropped by the Constitutional Convention of 1875 from the State of Texas's fifth and current Bill of Rights. Cf. ''Reid v. Rolling Fork Pub. Util. Dist.'', 979 F.2d 1084, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14225699397135994464#p1089 1089] (5th Cir. 1992) ("Reid also urges that even if his federal constitutional claim is defeated, his claim under the Texas Constitution's equal protection clause survives. . . . There is ample support in Texas case law for the District's contention that the same requirements are applied to equal protection challenges under the Texas Constitution as to those under the United States Constitution.").
Without any recorded debate, section twenty-one was dropped by the Constitutional Convention of 1875 from the State of Texas's fifth and current Bill of Rights. Cf. ''Reid v. Rolling Fork Pub. Util. Dist.'', 979 F.2d 1084, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14225699397135994464#p1089 1089] (5th Cir. 1992) ("Reid also urges that even if his federal constitutional claim is defeated, his claim under the Texas Constitution's equal protection clause survives. . . . There is ample support in Texas case law for the District's contention that the same requirements are applied to equal protection challenges under the Texas Constitution as to those under the United States Constitution.").
Retrieved from "https://texaslegalguide.com/Special:MobileDiff/4898"

Navigation menu