6,158
edits
Texas Constitution:Article I, Section 19: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Texas Constitution:Article I, Section 19 (view source)
Revision as of 11:03, October 28, 2025
, Yesterday at 11:03no edit summary
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
|recent= | |recent= | ||
* ''State v. Loe'', 692 S.W.3d 215, | * ''State v. Loe'', 692 S.W.3d 215, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9682881558926563485#p223 223] (Tex. 2024) ("For the reasons explained below, we conclude the Legislature made a permissible, rational policy choice to limit the types of available medical procedures for children, particularly in light of the relative nascency of both gender dysphoria and its various modes of treatment and the Legislature's express constitutional authority to regulate the practice of medicine. We therefore conclude the statute does not unconstitutionally deprive parents of their rights or physicians or health care providers of an alleged property right in their medical licenses or claimed right to occupational freedom. We also conclude . . . . We therefore reverse and vacate the trial court's order.") | ||
[https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9682881558926563485#p223 223] (Tex. 2024) ("For the reasons explained below, we conclude the Legislature made a permissible, rational policy choice to limit the types of available medical procedures for children, particularly in light of the relative nascency of both gender dysphoria and its various modes of treatment and the Legislature's express constitutional authority to regulate the practice of medicine. We therefore conclude the statute does not unconstitutionally deprive parents of their rights or physicians or health care providers of an alleged property right in their medical licenses or claimed right to occupational freedom. We also conclude . . . . We therefore reverse and vacate the trial court's order.") | |||
* ''State v. Zurawski'', 690 S.W.3d 644, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7571856369762417682#p666 666] (Tex. 2024) (footnote omitted) ("The [Texas] due-course . . . . An unsettled question in this Court is whether the due-course clause protects substantive rights in addition to procedural rights. We need not decide this question today. Even if the due-course clause were to encompass substantive rights, the evidence adduced does not support the trial court's order that the Human Life Protection Act violates the Texas Constitution. If the due-course clause affords fundamental rights as a matter of substantive law and not just procedural protections before the government invades them, the right to life would be found among them.") | * ''State v. Zurawski'', 690 S.W.3d 644, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7571856369762417682#p666 666] (Tex. 2024) (footnote omitted) ("The [Texas] due-course . . . . An unsettled question in this Court is whether the due-course clause protects substantive rights in addition to procedural rights. We need not decide this question today. Even if the due-course clause were to encompass substantive rights, the evidence adduced does not support the trial court's order that the Human Life Protection Act violates the Texas Constitution. If the due-course clause affords fundamental rights as a matter of substantive law and not just procedural protections before the government invades them, the right to life would be found among them.") | ||