4,834
edits
Texas Constitution:Article III, Section 18: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Texas Constitution:Article III, Section 18 (view source)
Revision as of 16:52, July 30, 2023
, July 30, 2023no edit summary
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
* ''Damon v. Cornett'', 781 S.W.2d 597, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10143333509410954628#p600 600] (Tex. 1989) ("We acknowledge that the framers of article III, section 18 were attempting to prevent improper financial gain . . . . We cannot agree with respondent, however, that the framers meant to place a lifetime 'mark of Cain' on every citizen who is willing to benefit our state by serving in the legislature. While it is highly desirable to bar improper personal gain by former legislators, we believe that this concern can be more effectively addressed through appropriate legislation rather than an overbroad judicial interpretation of the constitution.") | * ''Damon v. Cornett'', 781 S.W.2d 597, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10143333509410954628#p600 600] (Tex. 1989) ("We acknowledge that the framers of article III, section 18 were attempting to prevent improper financial gain . . . . We cannot agree with respondent, however, that the framers meant to place a lifetime 'mark of Cain' on every citizen who is willing to benefit our state by serving in the legislature. While it is highly desirable to bar improper personal gain by former legislators, we believe that this concern can be more effectively addressed through appropriate legislation rather than an overbroad judicial interpretation of the constitution.") | ||
* ''Hall v. Baum'', 452 S.W.2d 699, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9857901267552826713#p705 705] (Tex. 1970) ("Our analysis of the cited cases from other jurisdictions indicates a total lack of unanimity of thought as to the wisdom of nullifying the constitutional proscriptions with which we are dealing, as well as a lack of unanimity of reasons for their | * ''Hall v. Baum'', 452 S.W.2d 699, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9857901267552826713#p705 705] (Tex. 1970) ("Our analysis of the cited cases from other jurisdictions indicates a total lack of unanimity of thought as to the wisdom of nullifying the constitutional proscriptions with which we are dealing, as well as a lack of unanimity of reasons for their nullification. . . . If Sec. 18, Art. III, has outlived its usefulness and there is no longer need for the proscriptions there provided, as some of the courts of other states have indicated, the Constitution itself prescribes the remedy through a constitutional amendment submitted to and adopted by the people.") | ||
|seo_title=Article III, Section 18 of the Texas Constitution ("Ineligibility for Offices; Voting for Members; Interest in Contracts") | |seo_title=Article III, Section 18 of the Texas Constitution ("Ineligibility for Offices; Voting for Members; Interest in Contracts") | ||