By: Burrows H.B. No. 2139
A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
AN ACT
relating to the construction of codes, laws, and statutes.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
SECTION 1. Section 311.016, Government Code, is amended by
amending Subdivisions (2) and (3) to read as follows:
(2) "Shall" imposes a duty and is synonymous with
"must."
(3) "Must" imposes a duty and is synonymous with
"shall." [creates or recognizes a condition precedent.]
SECTION 2. Section 311.021, Government Code, is amended to
read as follows:
Sec. 311.021. INTENTIONALISM PROHIBITED [INTENTION IN
ENACTMENT OF STATUTES]. (a) When interpreting a statute, a court
is not to inquire into what members of the legislature intended or
hoped to accomplish, but shall enforce the statutory text as
written and in accordance with the meaning that the words of the
statute would have to an ordinary speaker of the English language.
See, e.g., Oliver Wendell Holmes, The Theory of Legal
Interpretation, 12 Harv. L. Rev. 417, 419 (1899) ("We do not inquire , 12 Harv. L. Rev. 417, 419 (1899) ("We do not inquire
what the legislature meant; we ask only what the statute means.")
[In enacting a statute, it is presumed that:
(1) compliance with the constitutions of this state
and the United States is intended;
(2) the entire statute is intended to be effective;
(3) a just and reasonable result is intended;
(4) a result feasible of execution is intended; and
(5) public interest is favored over any private
interest].
SECTION 3. Section 311.023, Government Code, is amended to
read as follows:
Sec. 311.023. RELIANCE ON LEGISLATIVE HISTORY PROHIBITED
[STATUTE CONSTRUCTION AIDS]. (a) In construing a statute[,
whether or not the statute is considered ambiguous on its face], a
court may not under any circumstance consider consult, cite, rely
upon, or give any weight to [among other matters the]:
(1) statements from individual legislators, including
bill authors and sponsors [object sought to be attained];
(2) committee reports of any type [circumstances under
which the statute was enacted];
(3) statements made in legislative hearings or floor
debates [legislative history]; or
(4) signing statements [common law or former statutory
provisions, including laws on the same or similar subjects;
(5) consequences of a particular construction;
(6) administrative construction of the statute; and
(7) title (caption), preamble, and emergency
provision].
SECTION 4. Section 311.025, Government Code, is amended by
amending Subsection (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 311.025. IRRECONCILABLE STATUTES AND AMENDMENTS.
(c) In determining whether amendments are irreconcilable,
text that is reenacted because of the requirement of Article III,
Section 36, of the Texas Constitution is not considered to be
irreconcilable with additions or omissions in the same text made by
another amendment. Unless clearly indicated to the contrary, an
amendment that reenacts text in compliance with that constitutional
requirement does not mean [indicate legislative intent] that the
reenacted text prevails [prevail] over changes in the same text
made by another amendment, regardless of the relative dates of
enactment.
SECTION 5. Section 311.026, Government Code, is amended by
amending Subsection (b) to read as follows:
(b) If the conflict between the general provision and the
special or local provision is irreconcilable, the special or local
provision prevails as an exception to the general provision, unless
the general provision is the later enactment and clearly and
unambiguously supersedes the special or local provision [the
manifest intent is that the general provision prevail].
SECTION 6. Section 311.028, Government Code, is amended to
read as follows:
Sec. 311.028. UNIFORM CONSTRUCTION OF UNIFORM ACTS. A
uniform act included in a code shall be construed, when possible,
[to effect its general purpose]to make uniform the law of those
states that enact it.
SECTION 7. Section 311.032, Government Code, is amended by
amending Subsections (a), (b), and (c) and adding Subsection (d) to
read as follows:
Sec. 311.032. SEVERABILITY OF STATUTES AND SAVING
CONSTRUCTIONS. (a) Unless a statute expressly includes a
nonseverability clause, every provision, section, subsection,
sentence, clause, phrase, and word of a statute, and every discrete
application of a statutory provision, section, subsection,
sentence, clause, phrase, or word to any person, group of persons,
or circumstances, shall be severable from each other [If any
statute contains a provision for severability, that provision
prevails in interpreting that statute].
(b) If any application of any statutory provision, section,
subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word to any person, group
of persons, or circumstances is found by any court to be invalid,
preeempted, or unconstitutional, for any reason whatsoever, then
all remaining applications of that statutory provision, section,
subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word to all other persons
and circumstances shall be severed and preserved, and shall remain
in effect. All valid, non-preempted, and constitutional
applications of any enacted statute shall be severed from any
applications that a court finds to be invalid, preeempted, or
unconstitutional, because it is the legislature's intent and
priority that every valid, non-preempted, and constitutional
application of its statutory enactments be allowed to stand alone
and remain enforceable [statute contains a provision for
nonseverability, that provision prevails in interpreting that
statute].
(c) No court may decline to enforce the severability
requirements of Subsections (a) and (b) on the ground that
severance would "rewrite" the statute or involve the court in
legislative or lawmaking activity. A court that declines to
enforce or enjoins a state official from enforcing a statutory
enactment, in whole or in part, is never rewriting a statute or
engaging in legislative or lawmaking activity, as the statute
continues to contain the same words as before the court's decision.
A judicial injunction or declaration of unconstitutionality:
(1) is nothing more than an edict prohibiting
enforcement of the disputed statute against the named parties to
that lawsuit, which may subsequently be vacated by a later court if
that court has a different understanding of the law;
(2) is not a formal amendment of the language in a
statute; and
(3) no more rewrites a statute than a decision by the
executive not to enforce a duly enacted statute in a limited and
defined set of circumstances [In a statute that does not contain a
provision for severability or nonseverability, if any provision of
the statute or its application to any person or circumstance is held
invalid, the invalidity does not affect other provisions or
applications of the statute that can be given effect without the
invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of
the statute are severable].
(d) If any state or federal court disregards any of the
severability requirements in Subsections (a), (b), or (c), and
declares or finds any statutory provision, section, subsection,
sentence, clause, phrase, or word to be facially or totally
invalid, preeempted, or unconstitutional, when there are discrete
applications of that statutory provision, section, subsection,
sentence, clause, phrase, or word that could be enforced against a
person, group of persons, or circumstances without violating
federal law or the federal or state constitutions, then that
statutory provision, section, subsection, sentence, clause,
phrase, or word shall be interpreted, as a matter of state law, as
if the legislature had explicitly limited its application to the
persons, group of persons, or circumstances for which its
application will not violate federal law or the federal or state
constitutions, and every court shall adopt and apply this saving
construction until the court ruling that pronounced the statutory
provision, section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word
facially or totally invalid, preeempted, or unconstitutional is
vacated or overruled.
SECTION 8. Section 311.034, Government Code, is amended to
read as follows:
Sec. 311.034. WAIVER OF SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY; JURISDICTIONAL
REQUIREMENTS. (a) In order to preserve the legislature's interest
in managing state fiscal matters through the appropriations
process, a statute shall not be construed as a waiver of sovereign
immunity unless the waiver is effected by clear and unambiguous
language.
(b) In a statute, the use of "person," as defined by Section
311.005 to include governmental entities, does not [indicate
legislative intent to] waive sovereign immunity unless the context
of the statute indicates no other reasonable construction.
(C) Statutory prerequisites to a suit, including the
provision of notice, are jurisdictional requirements in all suits
against a governmental entity.
SECTION 9. Subchapter C, Chapter 311, Government Code, is
amended by adding Section 311.037 to read as follows:
Sec. 311.037. GRAMMATICAL AND SCRIVENER'S ERROR. (a) A
grammatical or scrivener's error does not vitiate a law. If a
statute contains a grammatical or scrivener's error that would be
apparent to an ordinary reader of the English language, then the
Court may interpret the statute in the way that an ordinary reader
of the English language would understand the statute in light of the
grammatical or scrivener's error.
SECTION 9. Section 312.005, Government Code, is amended to
read as follows:
Sec. 312.005. INTENTIONALISM PROHIBITED [LEGISLATIVE
INTENT]. When [In] interpreting a statute, a court is not to
inquire into what members of the legislature intended or hoped to
accomplish, but shall enforce the statutory text as written and in
accordance with the meaning that the words of the statute would have
to an ordinary speaker of the English language. See, e.g., Oliver
Wendell Holmes, The Theory of Legal Interpretation, 12 Harv. L.
Rev. 417, 419 (1899) ("We do not inquire what the legislature meant;
we ask only what the statute means.") [shall diligently attempt to
ascertain legislative intent and shall consider at all times the
old law, the evil, and the remedy].
SECTION 10. Section 312.006, Government Code, is amended to
read as follows:
Sec. 312.006. RELIANCE ON LEGISLATIVE HISTORY PROHIBITED
[LIBERAL CONSTRUCTION]. (a) In construing a statute, a court may
not under any circumstance consider, consult, cite, rely upon, or
give any weight to:
(1) statements from individual legislators, including
bill authors and sponsors;
(2) committee reports of any type;
(3) statements made in legislative hearings or floor
debates; or
(4) signing statements [The Revised Statutes are the
law of this state and shall be liberally construed to achieve their
purpose and to promote justice].
SECTION 11. Section 312.012, Government Code, is amended to
read as follows:
Sec. 312.012. GRAMMATICAL AND SCRIVENER'S ERROR [GRAMMAR
AND PUNCTUATION]. [(a)] A grammatical or scrivener's error does
not vitiate a law. If a statute contains a grammatical or
scrivener's error that would be apparent to an ordinary reader of
the English language, then the Court may interpret the statute in
the way that an ordinary reader of the English language would
understand the statute in light of the grammatical or scrivener's
error [the sentence or clause is meaningless because of the
grammatical error, words and clauses may be transposed to give the
law meaning.
(b) Punctuation of a law does not control or affect
legislative intent in enacting the law].
SECTION 12. Section 312.013, Government Code, is amended by
amending subsection (a) and (b) and adding Subsections (c) and (d)
to read as follows:
Sec. 312.013. SEVERABILITY OF STATUTES AND SAVING
CONSTRUCTIONS. (a) Unless a statute expressly includes a
nonseverability clause, every provision, section, subsection,
sentence, clause, phrase, and word of a statute, and every discrete
application of a statutory provision, section, subsection,
sentence, clause, phrase, or word to any person, group of persons,
or circumstances, shall be severable from each other [expressly
provided otherwise, if any provision of a statute or its
application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the
invalidity does not affect other provisions or applications of the
statute that can be given effect without the invalid provision or
application, and to this end the provisions of the statute are
severable].
(b) If any application of any statutory provision, section,
subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word to any person, group
of persons, or circumstances is found by any court to be invalid,
preeempted, or unconstitutional, for any reason whatsoever, then
all remaining applications of that statutory provision, section,
subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word to all other persons
and circumstances shall be severed and preserved, and shall remain
in effect. All valid, non-preempted, and constitutional
applications of any enacted statute shall be severed from any
applications that a court finds to be invalid, preeempted, or
unconstitutional, because it is the legislature's intent and
priority that every valid, non-preempted, and constitutional
application of its statutory enactments be allowed to stand alone
and remain enforceable [This section does not affect the power or
duty of a court to ascertain and give effect to legislative intent
concerning severability of a statute].
(c) No court may decline to enforce the severability
requirements of Subsections (a) and (b) on the ground that
severance would "rewrite" the statute or involve the court in
legislative or lawmaking activity. A court that declines to
enforce or enjoins a state official from enforcing a statutory
enactment, in whole or in part, is never rewriting a statute or
engaging in legislative or lawmaking activity, as the statute
continues to contain the same words as before the court's decision.
A judicial injunction or declaration of unconstitutionality:
(1) is nothing more than an edict prohibiting
enforcement of the disputed statute against the named parties to
that lawsuit, which may subsequently be vacated by a later court if
that court has a different understanding of the law;
(2) is not a formal amendment of the language in a
statute; and
(3) no more rewrites a statute than a decision by the
executive not to enforce a duly enacted statute in a limited and
defined set of circumstances.
(d) If any state or federal court disregards any of the
severability requirements in Subsections (a), (b), or (c), and
declares or finds any statutory provision, section, subsection,
sentence, clause, phrase, or word to be facially or totally
invalid, preeempted, or unconstitutional, when there are discrete
applications of that statutory provision, section, subsection,
sentence, clause, phrase, or word that could be enforced against a
person, group of persons, or circumstances without violating
federal law or the federal or state constitutions, then that
statutory provision, section, subsection, sentence, clause,
phrase, or word shall be interpreted, as a matter of state law, as
if the legislature had explicitly limited its application to the
persons, group of persons, or circumstances for which its
application will not violate federal law or the federal or state
constitutions, and every court shall adopt and apply this saving
construction until the court ruling that pronounced the statutory
provision, section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word
facially or totally invalid, preeempted, or unconstitutional is
vacated or overruled.
SECTION 13. The following provisions of the Government Code
are repealed:
(1) Section 312.006(b); and
(2) Section 312.012(b).
SECTION 14. This Act takes effect immediately if it
receives a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each
house, as provided by Section 39, Article III, Texas Constitution.
If this Act does not receive the vote necessary for immediate
effect, this Act takes effect September 1, 2023.