HB 113 Introduced

Relating to statutory construction.

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT

relating to statutory construction.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:

SECTION 1. Sections 311.016(2) and (3), Government Code,

are amended to read as follows:

(2) “Shall” imposes a duty. The use of “shall” does not

indicate that an action is discretionary.

(3) “Must” imposes a requirement and either creates a

duty or creates or recognizes a condition precedent.

SECTION 2. Subchapter C, Chapter 311, Government Code, is

amended by adding Sections 311.0211, 311.0212, and 311.0213 to read

as follows:

Sec. 311.0211. INTENTIONALISM PROHIBITED. When

interpreting a statute, a court:

(1) may not inquire into what members of the

legislature intended to accomplish by enacting the statute; and

(2) 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.

Sec. 311.0212. USE OF LEGISLATURE HISTORY PROHIBITED. When

interpreting a statute, a court may not consider, consult, cite,

rely on, or give any weight to:

(1) any statement from an individual legislator,

including a statement by the author or sponsor of the bill that

enacted the statute or a statement made during a committee hearing

or debate of the bill on the floor of a house of the legislature;

(2) a committee report; or

(3) a statement of a presiding officer or the governor

made on the signing of the bill.

Sec. 311.0213. DEFERENCE TO AGENCY CONSTRUCTION

PROHIBITED. Notwithstanding any other law, a court is not required

to give deference to any construction of a statute by a state agency

responsible for administering, implementing, or enforcing the

statute. This section does not prohibit a court from considering a

state agency’s construction of a statute if that construction is

reasonable and does not conflict with the plain language of the

statute.

SECTION 3. Section 311.025(c), Government Code, is amended

to read as follows:

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 4. Section 311.026(b), Government Code, is amended

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 5. 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 6. Subchapter C, Chapter 311, Government Code, is

amended by adding Section 311.0311 to read as follows:

Sec. 311.0311. SEVERABILITY AND SAVING CONSTRUCTIONS. (a)

Unless a statute contains a provision expressly providing for

nonseverability, every provision, section, subsection, sentence,

clause, phrase, and word of the statute, including every discrete

application of the provision, section, subsection, sentence,

clause, phrase, or word to any person, group of persons, or

circumstance, is severable.

(b) If any application of any statutory provision, section,

subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word to any person, group

of persons, or circumstance is determined by a court to be invalid,

preempted, or unconstitutional, regardless of the reason, all

remaining applications of that statutory provision, section,

subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word to any other person,

group of persons, or circumstance shall be severed and preserved

and remain in effect.

non-preempted, and constitutional application of its statutory

enactments be allowed to stand alone and remain enforceable.

(d) A court may not decline to enforce the severability

requirements of this section on the grounds that the severance

would rewrite the statute or involve the court in legislative or

lawmaking activity. A court that declines to enforce, or that

enjoins a state official from enforcing, wholly or partly, a

statute is not considered to be rewriting a statute or engaging in

legislative or lawmaking activity because the statute continues to

contain the same words as before the court’s decision. A judicial

injunction or declaration of unconstitutionality:

(1) is only an edict prohibiting enforcement of the

disputed statute against the parties to that lawsuit and may

subsequently be vacated by a higher court based on a different

understanding of the law;

(2) is not a formal amendment of the language in a

statute; and

(3) does not rewrite the statute any more than a

decision by the executive not to enforce a duly enacted statute in a

limited and defined set of circumstances.

(e) If a court, in violation of this section, declares or

finds any statutory provision, section, subsection, sentence,

clause, phrase, or word to be facially or totally invalid,

preempted, 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 circumstance 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 person,

group of persons, or circumstance 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 declaring the statutory provision, section,

subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word facially or totally

invalid, preempted, or unconstitutional is vacated or overturned.

SECTION 7. Section 311.034, Government Code, is amended to

read as follows:

Sec. 311.034. WAIVER OF SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY; JURISDICTIONAL

REQUIREMENTS. 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. 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. Statutory

prerequisites to a suit, including the provision of notice, are

jurisdictional requirements in all suits against a governmental

entity.

SECTION 8. Subchapter C, Chapter 311, Government Code, is

amended by adding Section 311.037 to read as follows:

Sec. 311.037. GRAMMATICAL OR SCRIVENER’S ERROR. A

grammatical or scrivener’s error does not vitiate a law. A court

construing a statute that contains a grammatical or scrivener’s

error that would be apparent to an ordinary reader of the English

language may interpret the statute consistent with the

understanding of the statute by an ordinary reader of the English

language.

SECTION 9. Subchapter A, Chapter 312, Government Code, is

amended by adding Sections 312.0051, 312.0052, 312.0053, 312.0081,

and 312.0082 to read as follows:

Sec. 312.0051. INTENTIONALISM PROHIBITED. When