Texas Constitution talk:Article III, Section 56: Difference between revisions
Texas Constitution talk:Article III, Section 56 (edit)
Revision as of 07:36, September 20, 2023
, September 20, 2023→23-0656
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
Only the elections administrator in Harris County is abolished by the enactment. All other counties, whether above or below 3.5 million, with an elections administrator continue to have choice whether or not to abolish the position. | Only the elections administrator in Harris County is abolished by the enactment. All other counties, whether above or below 3.5 million, with an elections administrator continue to have choice whether or not to abolish the position. | ||
Classification by population is allowed because logical that larger population counties require different public policy rules than smaller populations counties. The Legislature claims it classifying counties according to population but the law does not treat all counties with a population of 3.3 million the same. One rule for Harris County and another rule for the other 253. That is conclusive proof that the LEgislature is not classifying counties according to population but by some other criteria. Question remains whether that criteria is valid under the applicable caselaw. | |||
Two approaches have emerged for determining whether a bracketing scheme meets the reasonable basis requirement. The first examines the relationship between the purpose or subject of the law and the criteria used to establish the bracket. The second examines whether the purpose of the law is of statewide, or only local, importance. Under the first method of analysis, the purposes and subject of the law under review are identified and then the criteria used to create the law's bracket are examined. The criteria must have a real relationship to the purposes sought to be accomplished by the law, something germane | Two approaches have emerged for determining whether a bracketing scheme meets the reasonable basis requirement. The first examines the relationship between the purpose or subject of the law and the criteria used to establish the bracket. The second examines whether the purpose of the law is of statewide, or only local, importance. Under the first method of analysis, the purposes and subject of the law under review are identified and then the criteria used to create the law's bracket are examined. The criteria must have a real relationship to the purposes sought to be accomplished by the law, something germane | ||