tuscl

New Texas Laws

Monday, August 29, 2011 5:12 PM
On Thursday, 1,500 new laws take effect in Texas. I've listed some of the more interesting and pertinent laws (note-the Texas Legislature meets for 10 weeks every other year) Bad bars: Permits to sell alcohol will not be issued to or renewed for bar owners whose permits have been pulled or canceled because of violent acts on their premises. Several lawmakers, including Davis and Rep. Lon Burnam, D-Fort Worth, worked on this measure, known as Erik's Law, which takes effect Sept. 1. (HB2707) The Texas legislature has adopted a law which provides that a plaintiff is responsible for the defendant's legal fees if their complaint is judged to be groundless in law or fact (loser pays on frivolous lawsuits). Funeral protests (HB718): Those who want to picket a Texas funeral must end their protests three hours before a funeral begins. Protestors also must wait for three hours to pass when funeral services conclude. Rape tests (SB1616): This law creates a faster timetable for the DNA testing process, requiring police investigators to submit rape-kit evidence for lab review within 30 days of collection. Those labs must then test the samples within three months. Campaign donors Political contributions for individual candidates will be limited to $5,000 from individuals and $10,000 from corporations, labor unions and trade associations. House Bill 1936 and Senate Bill 1407 were introduced to the Texas Legislature in early March 2011. These bills are identical and specifically repeal Sections 107.07(B) and (C) that allow personal importation of wine into the state of Texas. It is unknown whether this could apply to the current wine shipping law but it is certainly possible. Voters who show up to polls with only their voter registration cards will be given six days to produce a photo ID, or their ballots will not be counted.

9 comments

  • SuperDude
    •
    13 years ago
    What, if anything, does this say about Gov. Rick Perry?
  • EarlFire
    •
    13 years ago
    Rick bad for Texas
  • georgmicrodong
    •
    13 years ago
    I think HB718 won't pass 1st Amendment muster if somebody tries to push it. It's obvious why they passed it, of course, but the sliminess of the speech or speakers has never been considered grounds for censorship.
  • Dudester
    •
    13 years ago
    Super Dude asked:"What, if anything, does this say about Gov. Rick Perry?" He's been Governor for ten years, in a time of economic decline for the US, Texas is booming. The reason why is because Texas Governors are very active with the legislature. They push through laws, like "loser pays" on civil suits. That kind of thing creates a situation wherein 10,000 doctors have hung up their shingle in Texas in the past ten years (instead of fleeing the state (i.e. California, New York, and Illinois). The biggest problem with him becoming President next year is that Texas will lose it's Governor and Lt. Governor (the Lt. Guv is running for US Senator).
  • Dudester
    •
    13 years ago
    GMD, to ban, outright, a protest, would be foolish. To regulate when a protest can happen is a question that the US Supreme Court will most likely have to decide. I wish I could look in a crystal ball and say "this result will happen". Most likely, knuckleheads like Sotomayer and Kagan will see to it that it is granted certiarie. Roberts, Alito, and Scalia might side with Texas (I'm not sure). The First Amendment says you can protest, but doesn't specify when you can protest. Is the right to protest "on demand" implied ? Scalia can best answer that question.
  • georgmicrodong
    •
    13 years ago
    "Congress shall make no law [...] abridging the freedom of speech, [...] or the right of the people peaceably to assemble..." seems pretty unambiguous to me. If safety, or deliberate or negligent incitement, isn't an issue, then the state has no compelling interest in forbidding it. Like I said, and the courts have held over and over again, the distastefulness of the speech or speaker is not a consideration.
  • deogol
    •
    13 years ago
    Having lived in Texas I can say the governor really doesn't do much for legislation other than sign it or veto it. It's the lieutenant governor who really interacts with the legislative branch by law and policy of the legislative branch. So the governor can bully pulpit for laws and changes, but things are set up where the governor cannot just bring up laws. There is a reason for that in TX history ya know... The constitution is making a nice come back, especially where gun laws are concerned. These protestors, I don't know. I appreciate free speech, and I think it is routinely cracked down upon unconstitutionally. I don't mean just dancing, but people being arrested for video'ing cops, people being ticketed for flashing their lights as a warning of a cop hiding out, and storage of internet information from people connecting (mostly in Europe, but it is coming here.) Then again, with all the wars Obama has been continuing and starting (Libya/Yeman), I find it interesting there are no anti-war protests from the left like under Bush. (I am independent.) I will say that a lot of regulation is muting people. Requirements to pay off the police, pay off insurance companies, pay off the local government goons, etc. -- doesn't strike me has free speech, but if you can afford to pay the government speech.
  • deogol
    •
    13 years ago
    The wine thing definitely interferes with interstate commerce and will be a federal issue.
  • 10inches
    •
    13 years ago
    i like the idea of loser pays on frivilous lawsuits. this should stop some of the insane lawsuits that are filed.
You must be a member to leave a comment.Join Now
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion