Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1942 )

?l3msAmRNEy GENERAL GERALD C. MANN * ----- 11. - , Honorable Reuhen E. Senterfitt, Chairman Congressional and Legislative Districts Committee House of Representatives Austin, Texans Dear Mr. Centerfitt: Opinion No. O-4899 Re: Authority of the Legislature to redistrict the State into-represen- tative districts. We acknowledge receipt of your letter, asking for an opinion from this department, as follows: "Several bills have been before the Committee on Congressional and Legislative Districts, redistrict- ing the State in so far as the House of Representatives is concerned. A point of order has been raised that any such bill is unconstitutional. "According to the following Section of the Con- stitution, has the Legislature, at this session, the power to redistrict the State into Representative Dis- tricts? "Art. 3, Section 28. REAPPORTIONMENT AT EACH CENSUS. .The Legislature shall, at its first session after the publication of each United States decennial census, apportion the State into Senatorial and Representa- tive districts, agreeably to the provisions of Set's 25 and 26 of this Article; and until the next decennial census, when the first apportionment shall be made by the Legislature, the State shall be, and it is hereby divided into Senatorial and Representative districts as prgvided by an Ordinance of the Convention of that subject. We 'construeyour request to Involve the constitutional power of the Legislature ~to redistrict the State into Representative districts, wlthout at the same 'timeredistrlcting'the'state into.Senatorial districts. The answer to your inquiry requires a construction of Section 28, Article III, of the Constitution, quoted by you. This Section makes it theeduty of the,,Le publication of each United States decennial census into Senatorial and RepPsentative districts. It t&efore contemplates that the ~gis1atur.e will redis,trictthe State at such times, not Only as to Representative districts but also as to Senatorial districts. The mandat is applicable,alike to.b+?thRepresentative a.& Senatorial.redistricting. ‘, -* ,. Honorable Reuben E. Senterfitt = Rage 2 o-4899 It is not contemplated, however, (if It could be) that the redistricting for both the Senatorial and the Representative districts should be embodied in one bill. This might itself be violative of Article III, Section 35, of the Constitution, forbidding any bill to contain more than one subject, which shall be expressed in its title. This has long been the legislative construction of the Constitution, as, witness the present Senatorial districts were defined by H.B. No. 8, General Laws, 37th Legislature (1921) page 230, while the present Representative dis- tricts were defined by H.B. No. I of the same session. (Laws 1921, p. 264) See, also: Sub. H.B. No. 6, 7, 9, 25 and 29, 1st. C.S., 22d Leg. (1892), Laws of Tex. vol. X, p. 412; sub. H.~B.6 7, 9, 25 and 3?, 1st. C.S., 22d Leg. (1892) Laws of Texas, Vol. X, p. 414; Sub. H.B. No. 7, 27th Leg. (1901) 1st. C.S. p. 9, and Free Conf. Corn.Sub. for H.B. No. 4, Ibid p. 12. Earlier, however, the matter of redistricting the State as to both Senators and Representatives was accomplished by a single bill. See Chap. XII, 17th Leg. C.S. (1832) Laws of Texas, vol. Ix, p. 269; Chap. 45, 8th Leg. (18601 Laws of Texas Vol. IV, p. 1402; Chap. IV, 4th (1853) Laws of Texas Vol. 111: p. 1289; and Chap. XLIV, 3d Leg. of Texas, Vol. III, p. 478. If we should be wrong in our intimation that the redistrict- ing as to Senatorial and Representative districts could not be accomplished by one bill, nevertheless, we think it clear that it may be done by separate bills, and this of necessity, we think, would be valid as to each such redistricting bill unaffected by the other. There is no constitution forbidding such separate redistricting, or, in other words,,redistricting as to one purpose alone. There is nothing incongruous, or that is incom- patible with any law in such redist%icting for one purpose only. The Legislature might well find that the present Senatorial districts were fair, reasonable and adequate, whereas theepresent apportionment with respect to Representative districts was not satisfactory, or vice versa. The Legislature may pass any bill that is not clearly -- be- yond a reasonable doubt -- forbidden by the Constitution. Your inquiry does not present such a situation. The measure mentioned by you would be a valid exercise of the Legislative power. The opinion of this department, of date July 18, 1921, while not in point for the precise question you propound, is yet interesting, and may possibly be helpful. It is there said: "So that the situation is simply this: the__ purpose,.intent and splrit of the Constitution would not be complied with by passing an apportionment act at this time with a proviso that It shall not take effect until a certain time In 1924; but as there is no power to compel the Legislature to enact a law at a particular time or to enact one at all, and there being no inhibition against the passage of laws to take effect in the future, it ca~nnotbe said that an act reapportioning the State into senatoria,ldistricts effective some time in 1924 would be invalid. The apportionment now existing would continue to exist -L _ Honorable Reuben E. Senterfitt - Page 3 o-4899 until a reapportionment is made, and as above shown, the new apportionment is not made until the reappor- tionment act takes effect." -- Opinions Attorney General 1920-22, p. 188. It was further said: I'** * * * since the Legislature did not ap- portion the.Sfate~lnto senatorial districts at the Regular Session of the Thirty-seventh Legislature it is still authorized and In duty aboundto do so at this time." We trust that what we have said sufficiently answers your inquiry Very truly yours ATTORNEY G-m OF TEXAS By s/Ocie Speer Ocie Speer Assistant OS-MR-WC APPROVED MARCH 6, 1943 s/ Gerald C. Mann ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS Approved Opinion Committee By s/BWB Chairman