4,834
edits
Texas Constitution:Article III, Section 56: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Texas Constitution:Article III, Section 56 (view source)
Revision as of 09:22, August 27, 2023
, August 27, 2023no edit summary
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| (24 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
For more than a hundred years, approximately three-fourths of state constitutions have contained provisions restricting the enactment of local and special laws. Some of the provisions are relatively simple and some, referred to as laundry lists, are rather lengthy. Such provisions serve a variety of purposes, including: (1) preventing the Legislature from usurping local government control over public policy matters normally handled locally (i.e., stopping the Legislature "from meddling in local matters"); and (2) reserving more time for the Legislature to study, debate and address public policy matters important to the whole state. | For more than a hundred years, approximately three-fourths of state constitutions have contained provisions restricting the enactment of local and special laws. Some of the provisions are relatively simple and some, referred to as laundry lists, are rather lengthy. Such provisions serve a variety of purposes, including: (1) preventing the Legislature from usurping local government control over public policy matters normally handled locally (i.e., stopping the Legislature "from meddling in local matters"); and (2) reserving more time for the Legislature to study, debate and address public policy matters important to the whole state. | ||
The first broad prohibition on local and special laws to appear in a Texas constitution was added by amendment to the Texas Constitution of 1869. In January 1874, the provision | The first broad prohibition on local and special laws to appear in a Texas constitution was added by amendment to the Texas Constitution of 1869. In January 1874, the provision (Art. XII, Sec. [https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth6731/m1/237/ 40]) became effective when ratified by the Legislature. It read: "The legislature shall not pass local or special laws in any of the following enumerated cases: that is to say, [1] for locating or changing county seats, [2] regulating county or town affairs, [3] regulating the practice in courts of justice, [4] regulating the duties and jurisdiction of justices of the peace and constables, [5] providing for changes of venue in civil and criminal causes, [6] incorporating cities and towns, or changing or amending the charter of any city or village, [7] providing for the management of common schools, [8] regulating the rates of interest on money, [9] remitting fines, penalties, or forfeitures, [10] changing the law of descent. In all other cases when a general law can be made applicable, no special law shall be enacted; or in any case when a general law can be made applicable, no special law shall be enacted. The legislature shall enact general laws providing for the cases before enumerated in this section, and for all other cases which, in its judgment, may be provided by general laws." | ||
Rather than expanding or otherwise modifying the | Rather than expanding or otherwise modifying the 1874 provision, this section, as adopted in 1876, instead closely tracked the lengthy provision (Art. IV, Sec. [https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1002&context=mo_constitutions_race&#page=33 53]) contained in the recently-adopted Missouri Constitution of 1875, which read in part: "The General Assembly shall not pass any local or special law: [1] Authorizing the creation, extension or impairing of liens; [2] Regulating the affairs of counties, cities, townships, wards or school districts; [3] Changing the names of persons or places; [4] Changing the venue in civil or criminal cases; [5] Authorizing the laying out, opening, altering or maintaining [sic] roads, highways, streets or alleys; [6] Relating to ferries or bridges, or incorporating ferry or bridge companies except for the erection of bridges crossing streams . . . . In all other cases, where a general law can be made applicable, no local or special law shall be enacted; and whether a general law could have been made applicable in any case, is hereby declared a judicial question, and as such shall be judicially determined without regard to any legislative assertion on that subject. Nor shall the General Assembly indirectly enact such special or local law by the partial repeal of a general law; but laws repealing local or special acts may be passed." | ||
This section has been amended once. The 2001 modification was part of a "constitutional cleanup amendment." It made | This section has been amended once. The 2001 modification was part of a "constitutional cleanup amendment." It made stylistic changes and transferred the substance of Sections [[Texas Constitution:Article XVI, Section 22|22]] and [[Texas Constitution:Article XVI, Section 43|43]] of Article XVI to this section. The local and special laws authorized by other sections, either expressly or by implication, include laws: (1) creating or affecting a conservation and reclamation district (Article XVI, Section [[Texas Constitution:Article XVI, Section 59|59]]); (2) creating or affecting a hospital district (Article IX, Sections [[Texas Constitution:Article IX, Section 4|4]]-[[Texas Constitution:Article IX, Section 11|11]]); (3) concerning the court system (Article V, Sections [[Texas Constitution:Article V, Section 1|1]], [[Texas Constitution:Article V, Section 7|7]], [[Texas Constitution:Article V, Section 8|8]], & [[Texas Constitution:Article V, Section 21|21]]); (4) creating or affecting road or water districts (Article III, Section [[Texas Constitution:Article III, Section 52|52]]); (5) granting aid or a release from taxes in cases of public calamity (Article III, Section [[Texas Constitution:Article III, Section 51|51]], Article VIII, Section [[Texas Constitution:Article VIII, Section 10|10]]); (6) creating or affecting airport authorities (Article IX, Section [[Texas Constitution:Article IX, Section 12|12]]); (7) providing for consolidation of functions of political subdivisions (Article III, Section [[Texas Constitution:Article III, Section 64|64]]); (8) relating to stock laws (Article XVI, Section [[Texas Constitution:Article XVI, Section 23|23]]); and (9) providing for road maintenance (Article VIII, Section [[Texas Constitution:Article VIII, Section 9|9]]). | ||
The | The Texas jurisprudence regarding this section, like that of its sister states regarding similar provisions contained in their constitutions, is rather indefinite. However, as reflected by the decisions referenced below, the Texas jurisprudence in this area is within the national mainstream. Given the foregoing, the following is thought to be a fair summary of the applicable rule: A statute which relates to persons, places or things as a class, both in the present and in the future, which class is based upon a difference which bears a reasonable relation to the act in respect to which the classification is proposed, is a general law, while a statute which relates to particular persons, places or things of a class, or to a class as it is constituted at a given time, without allowances for changes in the future, or to a class which bears no reasonable relation to the statute in question is a special law. A local law is a special law in which the objects to which the act applies are units of local government. Note that the substance of the foregoing rule is often stated in different terms. More importantly, recognize that the rule is routinely bent or ignored by courts when necessary to reach a result they believe to be just. | ||
|recent= | |recent= | ||
| Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
* ''State Highway Department v. Gorham'', 162 S.W.2d 934, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/162_SW2_934.pdf#page=4 937] (Tex. 1942) ("If the Act be construed as a special law, depriving the State of a defense in a particular case, it is unconstitutional, as being violative of Section 3 of the Texas Bill of Rights, which provides that all men shall have equal rights. It is also violative of Article III, Section 56, of our State Constitution, which provides that no local or special law shall be enacted where a general law can be made applicable. . . . It certainly was not the intention of the framers of our Constitution that the State should have certain defenses against some individuals, but not against others similarly situated.") | * ''State Highway Department v. Gorham'', 162 S.W.2d 934, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/162_SW2_934.pdf#page=4 937] (Tex. 1942) ("If the Act be construed as a special law, depriving the State of a defense in a particular case, it is unconstitutional, as being violative of Section 3 of the Texas Bill of Rights, which provides that all men shall have equal rights. It is also violative of Article III, Section 56, of our State Constitution, which provides that no local or special law shall be enacted where a general law can be made applicable. . . . It certainly was not the intention of the framers of our Constitution that the State should have certain defenses against some individuals, but not against others similarly situated.") | ||
* ''Ex parte Carson'', 159 S.W.2d 126, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/159_SW2_126.pdf#page= | * ''Ex parte Carson'', 159 S.W.2d 126, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/159_SW2_126.pdf#page=4 129] (Tex.Crim.App. 1942) ("History of legislation reveals to us a very early practice, having a persistent accelerated tendency, against which the framers of the Constitution were, undoubtedly, endeavoring to provide an insurmountable barrier in Section 56, Article 3 of our Constitution. The trading and trafficking in the passing of local and special laws resulting in special privileges and immunities may be viewed as one of the danger elements in all legislative bodies which consists of representatives from varied districts not affected always in all matters by the things which the other may do or not do.") | ||
* ''Anderson v. Wood'', 152 S.W.2d 1084, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/152_SW2_1084.pdf#page=4 1087] (Tex. 1941) ("We can conceive of no reason why the Commissioners' Courts of counties with a population of less than 195,000 and those with populations in excess of 205,000 should have a right to employ county traffic officers, while the Commissioners' Court of Tarrant County, such county . . . . The necessity for the employment of traffic officers in Tarrant County appears to be as urgent as in counties of lesser population. The classification appears to be an arbitrary one bearing no relation to the subject of legislation, and as a consequence this particular section of the act is void as a local or special law.") | * ''Anderson v. Wood'', 152 S.W.2d 1084, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/152_SW2_1084.pdf#page=4 1087] (Tex. 1941) ("We can conceive of no reason why the Commissioners' Courts of counties with a population of less than 195,000 and those with populations in excess of 205,000 should have a right to employ county traffic officers, while the Commissioners' Court of Tarrant County, such county . . . . The necessity for the employment of traffic officers in Tarrant County appears to be as urgent as in counties of lesser population. The classification appears to be an arbitrary one bearing no relation to the subject of legislation, and as a consequence this particular section of the act is void as a local or special law.") | ||