Texas Constitution:Article I, Section 28: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
no edit summary
mNo edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 31: Line 31:
|recent=
|recent=


* ''Abbott v. Harris Cnty.'', 672 S.W.3d 1, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3006813386139274701#p--- ---] (Tex. 2023) (" ...")
* ''Abbott v. Harris Cnty.'', 672 S.W.3d 1, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3006813386139274701#p14 14] (Tex. 2023) (" ...")


* ''In re Hotze'', 629 S.W.3d 146, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9645594308312450856#p148 148] (Tex. 2020) (J. Devine, concurring) ("This provision means what it says. The judiciary may not suspend laws. Nor may the executive. Only the Legislature. Despite this clear constitutional exhortation, we review orders from the Governor that purport to be made under the Texas Disaster Act of 1975, which says that the 'governor may suspend provisions of any regulatory statute prescribing the . . . . The State does not contend why [''Brown Cracker & Candy Co. v. City of Dallas''] was wrongly decided or why we should otherwise overrule that decision. The State's failure to address this precedent is troubling.")
* ''In re Hotze'', 629 S.W.3d 146, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9645594308312450856#p148 148] (Tex. 2020) (J. Devine, concurring) ("This provision means what it says. The judiciary may not suspend laws. Nor may the executive. Only the Legislature. Despite this clear constitutional exhortation, we review orders from the Governor that purport to be made under the Texas Disaster Act of 1975, which says that the 'governor may suspend provisions of any regulatory statute prescribing the . . . . The State does not contend why [''Brown Cracker & Candy Co. v. City of Dallas''] was wrongly decided or why we should otherwise overrule that decision. The State's failure to address this precedent is troubling.")

Navigation menu