Texas judge has declared unconstitutional a law that limits the power of Democrat-led cities

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

A Texas judge has declared unconstitutional a law championed by Gov. Greg Abbott that limits the power of Democrat-led cities


Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas, a Republican, signed a bill into law in June that prohibited cities from passing certain local ordinances. It was widely seen as an effort to curb the power of Democrat-led cities.

Now, a judge has ruled it unconstitutional.

District Judge Maya Guerra Gamble of Texas announced the decision on Wednesday in response to a lawsuit from the city of Houston.

"I am thrilled that Houston, our legal department, and sister cities were able to obtain this victory for Texas cities," Mayor Sylvester Turner of Houston wrote in a statement. "HB 2127 was a power grab by the Legislature and an unwarranted and unconstitutional intrusion into local power granted to Houston and other home-rule cities by the Texas Constitution."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/a-texas-judge-has-declared-unconstitutional-a-law-championed-by-gov-greg-abbott-that-limits-the-power-of-democrat-led-cities/ar-AA1g0onN

[MagickMuffin]

1. Indeed it is a power grab denying the city of their election officials

The only way they can turn Houston red is to subvert the process.

[Lithos]

2. It is not about turning Houston Red

It is a case of suppressing the wishes of a majority of citizens.

L-

[MagickMuffin]

3. Which is the process of turning Houston red, it's a pipe dream

I realize that would probably never happen but as a 5th generation Texan I know how they subvert and oppress the will of the voters.


I’ve worked elections as a Precinct chair until 2016, that was my last time serving as an alternate presiding judge.

[republianmushroom]

4. Now that will PO a lot of Texans.

[LeftInTX]

7. No it won't because nothing happened. It's just an opinion and has no teeth.

It's a Democratic local judge. Decision has been appealed to the all Republican Texas Supreme Court.
Law goes into effect tomorrow.

https://news4sanantonio.com/news/local/judge-blocks-texas-death-sar-law-that-erodes-cities-power-to-enact-local-rules-san-antonio-house-bill-2127-houston-ruling-constitution“The judgment today by a Democrat Travis County District Judge is not worth the paper it’s printed on,” Burrows said after the ruling. “The Texas Supreme Court will ultimately rule this law to be completely valid. The ruling today has no legal effect or precedent, and should deter no Texan from availing themselves of their rights when HB2127 becomes law on September 1, 2023.”

[republianmushroom]

8. Says here it is a ruling.

Texas judge has declared unconstitutional a law that limits the power of Democrat-led cities
A Texas judge has declared unconstitutional a law championed by Gov. Greg Abbott that limits the power of Democrat-led cities
Now, a judge has ruled it unconstitutional.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/a-texas-judge-has-declared-unconstitutional-a-law-championed-by-gov-greg-abbott-that-limits-the-power-of-democrat-led-cities/ar-AA1g0onN

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100218236722

[LeftInTX]

12. Despite judge's ruling, Death Star bill will still go into effect Friday

https://news4sanantonio.com/news/local/judge-blocks-texas-death-sar-law-that-erodes-cities-power-to-enact-local-rules-san-antonio-house-bill-2127-houston-ruling-constitution

She's a state circuit judge, not a federal judge. She found it violated the Texas constitution and if she found it violated the US Constitution, it is not the correct jurisdiction.
The all Republican Texas Supreme Court will be the appellate court.

Only a federal judge can stop a bill based on the US Constitution.

[LeftInTX]

5. She didn't prevent the law from going into effect: Which is tomorrow, Sept 1st.

The AG is appealing her decision to the Texas Supreme Court.

I applaud our Democratic district court judges, but when it comes to statewide laws, they don't have much teeth. Her opinion is not going to change the implementation of this specific law.

We saw this with the abortion law, with the Harris County election admin law, and the anti-puberty blocker laws. All were found unconstitutional by Democratic District Judges, but were sent to all Republican Texas Supreme Court.


https://news4sanantonio.com/news/local/judge-blocks-texas-death-sar-law-that-erodes-cities-power-to-enact-local-rules-san-antonio-house-bill-2127-houston-ruling-constitution
“The judgment today by a Democrat Travis County District Judge is not worth the paper it’s printed on,” Burrows said after the ruling. “The Texas Supreme Court will ultimately rule this law to be completely valid. The ruling today has no legal effect or precedent, and should deter no Texan from availing themselves of their rights when HB2127 becomes law on September 1, 2023.”

[Silent3]

6. Democratically-led cities

Fixed that for them.

[Celerity]

11. the OP is the one who altered it, twice

original:



OP altered:

[Silent3]

14. Ugh.

And here I was trying to give a fellow DUer the benefit of the doubt.

[dflprincess]

20. Thank you nt

[treestar]

24. IMO it works ok with the hyphen

As in city led by a Democrat.

[Ms. Toad]

25. A more accurate fix would be just "cities."

The law impacts home rule - which applies to all cities. Not just those led by Democrats.

[malaise]

9. Good

Rec

[Recycle_Guru]

10. we must continue to fight these fascist block by block

[keithbvadu2]

13. Repubs prattle on about state's rights, parental rights, local control... until it interferes with t

Repubs prattle on about state's rights, parental rights, local control... until it interferes with their own big gov't.

[OMGWTF]

15. My personal bugaboo -- There is no such thing as the "Democrat party."

It's 'Democratic-led cities'. FFS!

[4lbs]

18. Yeah, I guess someone there caught that too, and changed it.

Now when one goes to the link, everything reads "Democratic" now.

Makes me wonder though, about the original writer and editor.

EDIT: Just read the posts above, so...

[thomski64]

16. ...I'm sure that means Cities..

..run by Democrats, or Democatic administrations
.. and not the insulting " limpballs" frame..

[4lbs]

17. Nice. So... Texas Republicans took a Gamble... and lost.

Somehow I think that Governor Abbott is frantically searching for a loophole that will still allow him to do all those vile things in that law.

[LeftInTX]

19. They didn't lose at all. It's a local Democratic, Travis County judge, not a federal judge.

Despite judge's ruling, Death Star bill will still go into effect FridayUPDATE: According to the Attorney General of Texas, the bill will continue to go into effect this Friday.

“While the judge declared HB 2127 unconstitutional, she did not enjoin enforcement of the law by Texans who are harmed by local ordinances, which HB 2127 preempts. The Office of the Attorney General has also immediately appealed because the ruling is incorrect. This will stay the effect of the court’s declaration pending appeal. As a result, HB 2127 will go into effect on September 1,” stated the Attorney General of Texas.

“The judgment today by a Democrat Travis County District Judge is not worth the paper it’s printed on,” Burrows said after the ruling. “The Texas Supreme Court will ultimately rule this law to be completely valid. The ruling today has no legal effect or precedent, and should deter no Texan from availing themselves of their rights when HB2127 becomes law on September 1, 2023.”

Only a federal judge can legally declare that a state wide law violates that US Constitution. This was a local judge. If she said it violated the US Constitution, she doesn't have standing. If she's saying it violates the Texas Constitution, then it goes through the state courts. The appeal is going to the all Republican Texas State Supreme Court.

This has already happened three times this summer. It happened with the puberty blocker bill last week. A Travis County judge said it was constitutional, it was appealed to the Texas Supreme Court. Puberty blockers will be banned tomorrow. Same with the Harris County Elections Admin Case. (However, that case has better chance if it is filed in federal court. )

[LiberalFighter]

21. There need to be serious consequences for knowingly passing unconstitutional laws.

[Ms. Toad]

26. Had the law been as described in the headlines, it would have been knowingly passing

unconstitutional laws.

It isn't, though. The law applies to home rule, regardless of which party is in charge.

[LeftInTX]

29. The judge must have found something in the law that violates the Texas Constitution, but

her opinion is being appealed to the all Republican Supreme Court. (Caveat: The Texas constitution promises lots of things and delivers on few, such as adequate funding of public education)

She also did not stay the law, so it goes into affect at midnight.

[Ms. Toad]

33. My point is that the headline inaccurately describes the law.

The law says absolutely nothing about cities led by Democrats. It is a law about home rule. It may or may not be constitutional - I don't know Texas law. But it is misleading to describe the law as "limit{ing} the power of Democrat-led cities." It also limits the power of Republican-led cities.

[LeftInTX]

34. I have not read the law, but this follows a spate of local laws that:

Banned plastic bags
Banned fracking in city limits.

Plastic bag bans and fracking bans were specifically outlawed in the 2013 session.

Now this is a broad law to pre-empt many local ordinances.

My question: Does it go too far? Does it prevent things like local speed limits and codes etc? (I have not read the law, so I don't know)
Every session alot of legislation is hap-hazardly passed that contradicts all sorts of thing.

Abbott said the purpose of the bill was to keep Texas "business friendly". Also, it was also in response to local abortion and marijuana ordinances.

[Ms. Toad]

35. I haven't dealt with it in Texas.

But from my Ohio dealings with home rule laws, it is about as complicated as the Federal/State preemption laws. Mostly what I remember is that when we got a home rule case my Judge would ask me to grab the Oak Tree case (which he had written on the binding of the reporter).

But, again, what I was commenting on was solely the description of the law as limiting the power of Democrat-led cities - specifically. It doesn't, at least not any more than it limits the power of Republican-led cities.

[Zeitghost]

36. What should the penelty be

For those who pass gun control laws that get struck down?

[eallen]

22. To clarify, the judge ruled the law violates the Texas constitution

The Texas constitution includes clauses about home rule for cities.

It's poor reporting that the story didn't even say which constitution was at issue.

[LeftInTX]

30. Thank you! Thought it had something to do with this.

Each session, Texas hap-hazardly creates laws that contradict, it's own constitution.

This is going to be appealed with the all Republican Supreme Court, which often doesn't follow their own rules.

[PortTack]

23. Uh oh...Houston will be bluer than ever in '24!

[Marthe48]

27. Listening to MSNBC about Houston school takeover

Does this ruling mean that the takeover that already happened will be reversed?

I'm so sick of fascist takeover by mouthbreathing, jackbooted, penile inadequate asses.

[LeftInTX]

31. No! This ruling means nothing...Law goes into effect at midnight.

It's a local judge's opinion only. She did nothing but write an opinion.

Houston ISD has nothing to do with the City of Houston. It's under the governance of it's own political subdivision and the state itself. (TEA)

[Marthe48]

32. That's too bad

ty for answering

[Initech]

28. Fuck you MAGAs!