Texas Constitution:Article III, Section 36: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Texas Constitution:Article III, Section 36 (view source)

Revision as of 12:17, July 25, 2023

3 bytes removed ,  July 25, 2023
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 13: Line 13:
|historic=
|historic=


* ''Popham v. Patterson'', 51 S.W.2d 680, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/051_S.W.2d_680.pdf#page=5 684] (Tex. 1932) ("Appellee contends that the act of 1930 is void because in violation of section 36, article 3 . . . . It is true that the act of 1930 does have effect to change article 2688 in part; the change being to fix the term of office of county school superintendents at four instead of two years, but the mere fact that a later act amends a former act by implication does not render the later act repugnant to the above constitutional provision. Cooley's Constitutional Limitation (8th Ed.) vol. 8, p. 315; Southerland on Statutory Construction (2d Ed.) vol. 1, p. 446.")
* ''Popham v. Patterson'', 51 S.W.2d 680, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/051_SW2_680.pdf#page=5 684] (Tex. 1932) ("Appellee contends that the act of 1930 is void because in violation of section 36, article 3 . . . . It is true that the act of 1930 does have effect to change article 2688 in part; the change being to fix the term of office of county school superintendents at four instead of two years, but the mere fact that a later act amends a former act by implication does not render the later act repugnant to the above constitutional provision. Cooley's Constitutional Limitation (8th Ed.) vol. 8, p. 315; Southerland on Statutory Construction (2d Ed.) vol. 1, p. 446.")


* ''Henderson v. City of Galveston'', 114 S.W. 108, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/Vol_114_SWR_108.pdf#page=5 112] (Tex. 1908) ("But when the Legislature in enacting new legislation adopts the mode of amending existing laws, the Constitution speaks and prescribes a rule that must be followed. That was the mode expressly adopted here, and the amendment was attempted by 'adding to' the existing section. . . . But no authority cited, and none that we know of, has held that a section of a statute may be amended by adding words to it, without re-enacting the entire section as amended, and such a holding would be condemned by the plain words of the Constitution.")
* ''Henderson v. City of Galveston'', 114 S.W. 108, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/Vol_114_SWR_108.pdf#page=5 112] (Tex. 1908) ("But when the Legislature in enacting new legislation adopts the mode of amending existing laws, the Constitution speaks and prescribes a rule that must be followed. That was the mode expressly adopted here, and the amendment was attempted by 'adding to' the existing section. . . . But no authority cited, and none that we know of, has held that a section of a statute may be amended by adding words to it, without re-enacting the entire section as amended, and such a holding would be condemned by the plain words of the Constitution.")
Retrieved from "https://texaslegalguide.com/Special:MobileDiff/5258"

Navigation menu