Texas House Bill HB1129

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Introduced: 2/3/11
• Out of House Committee: 4/18/11
• Voted on by House: 5/15/11
• Refer: 2/28/11
• Out of Senate Committee: 5/20/11
• Report Pass: 4/14/11
• Voted on by Senate: 5/24/11
• Engrossed: 5/15/11
• Governor Action: 6/17/11
• Refer: 5/16/11
• Report Pass: 5/20/11
• Enrolled: 5/25/11
• Passed: 6/17/11

Caption

Relating to a study by the attorney general of the effects on state law and authority of certain international and other agreements and bodies.

Impact

The implications of the study could be substantial for the future regulation of international compacts and agreements within Texas. If the Attorney General finds evidence that such agreements interfere with state authority, it may provoke legislative action to safeguard Texas laws from external influences. By highlighting potential conflicts with international organizations—like the World Trade Organization or the United Nations—this bill raises crucial issues regarding the balance of international and state law, affecting areas such as commerce, public health, and environmental policies.

Summary

House Bill 1129 mandates the Texas Attorney General to conduct a study examining the impact of international agreements and bodies on Texas state law and authority. The aim of this bill is to evaluate whether any existing or proposed compact or agreement involving foreign entities is undermining or preempting Texas law. This study will encompass a wide range of international agreements, including those related to trade, health, and governance, indicating a significant focus on how these external influences may encroach on state sovereignty.

Contention

Notable points of contention around HB1129 may center on the varying perceptions of foreign influence in local law. Proponents of the bill argue that it’s essential to protect Texas’s legal framework from external pressures that could compromise state autonomy. Conversely, opponents might view the bill as fostering isolationism or as unnecessary skepticism towards beneficial international cooperation. The study could ignite a broader debate on the intersection of local governance and international engagement, highlighting ideological divides regarding globalism and national sovereignty.