Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1979 )


Menu:
  •                        The Attorney               General of Texas
    August    7,   1979
    MARK WHITE
    Attorney General
    Honorable Joseph N. Murphy, Jr.      Opinion No. MW-40
    Executive Director
    Employees Retirement System of Texas Re: Credit of legislative service
    P. 0. Box 12337, Capitol Station     for judicial retirement.
    Austin, Texas 787R
    Dear Mr. Murphy:
    You have requested our opinion regarding the crediting of legislative
    service for judicial retirement. Specifically, you ask whether section 2B of
    article SZZSb,V.T.C.S., is constitutionaL That statute provides:
    i2B. The time served in the Legislature of the State
    of Texas by any judge coming within the purview of
    this statute shall be credited to the length of judicial
    service.
    In Attorney General Cpiiion M-830 (1971),this office, relying on the
    Supreme  Court’s decision in
    Retirement System of Texx’
    ttlhe Legislature may net constitutionally authorize
    benefits under the Judicial Retirement System to be
    based in part on services rendered as a member of
    another retirement system.. . .
    In light of this opinion, we believe that, at least in 1971,section 2B of article
    6228b’was unconstitutionab
    In 1975, however, the voters approved article XVI, section 67, of the
    Texas Constitution, which, inter alia, authorized the legislature to “enact
    general laws establishing systems and programs of retirement.. . .” The
    subsection relating to the Judicial Retirement System now provides, in
    pertinent part:
    (d) Notwithstanding any other provision of           this
    section, the system of retirement, disability,       and
    survivors’ benefits heretofore established in         the
    constitution or by law for justices, judges,         and
    p.    116
    .       .
    HonorableJoseph N. Murphy,Jr.         -   Page Two       (Hw-40)
    commissioners of the appellate courts and judges of the district and
    criminal district courts is continued in effect.. . .
    Attorney General Opinion H-1073 (1977) held that the ratification of article XVI,
    section 67 was sufficient to remove doubt about the constitutionality of a statute which
    permitted the transfer of retirement credit from the County and District Retirement
    System to the Judicial Retirement System. The statute under consideration there,
    however, section LOB(b)of article 1926a, V.T.C.S., had been origiiaRy enacted in 1977,
    subsequent to the ratification of article XVI, section 67. By contrast, the statute at issue
    here, section 2B of article 62284 was enacted in 1969, and has not been amended.
    It is well established that a statute which is
    forbidden by the Constitution at the time of its passage is
    absolutely null and void, and is not validated by a subsequent
    amendment to the Constitution authorizing it to pass such an act.
    State ex reL Rogers v. Swanson, 
    219 N.W.2d 726
    , 729 (Neb. 1974). See also Grayson-
    Robinson Stores, Inc. v. Oneida, Ltd., 
    75 S.E.2d 16l
    , 163 (Ga. 19531,cert. denied, 
    346 U.S. 823
    0953); State ex reL Stevenson v. Tufly, 
    22 P. 1054
    (Nev. 1890); Dullam v. Wilson, 19
    N.W. R2 (Mich. %884). To hold that a constitutional amendment is curative of an
    unconstitutional statute
    would give the amendment the effect of enacting laws instead of
    merely authorizing the legislature to do so, and it would be to.
    enact a law to which no reference was made, and which the people
    in adopting the amendment could.not have had in mind.
    Bonaz v. Smith, 
    65 P. 309
    , 310 (CaL 19Ol). Unless the amendment itself specifically
    validates a previously unconstitutional statute, as’in Hutchinson v. Pat&ii& 126SW. 1107
    (Tex. 1910Xthe statute remains void and may be made effective only by reenactment
    Grayson-RobinsonStores, susu at 164. We conclude, therefore, that section 2B of article
    6228b is presently unconstitutionaL Accordingly, legislative service may not be credited
    for purposes of calculating judicial retirement eligibility or benefits.
    SUMMARY
    Section 2B of‘. article 62284 V.T.C.S., which authorized the
    crediting of legwlative service for purposes of calculating judicial
    retirement benefits, remains unconstitutional and has not been
    revived by the ratification of article XVI, section 67 of the Texas
    Constitution.
    @4fG%?&
    Attorney General of Texas
    p.   117
    .-
    Honorable Joseph N. Murphy,Jr.     -   Page Three      (NW-40 1
    JOHN W. FAINTER,JR.
    First Assistant Attorney General
    TED L. HARTLEY
    Executive Assistant Attorney General
    Prepared by Rick Gilpin
    Assistant Attorney General
    APPROVED:
    OPINIONCOMMITTEE
    C. Robert
    .      Heath, Chairman
    Dawd B. Brooks       .
    SusanGarrison
    .Rick Gilpin       ‘~“’  ..
    Harry Green
    William G ,Reid
    Bruce
    :;,Y Yqqblood
    ,~
    p.   118
    

Document Info

Docket Number: MW-40

Judges: Mark White

Filed Date: 7/2/1979

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017