Case Information
*1 _-
. .- a23 Offices OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN .1 :,
~--%!im-ti
fionorablo John 0. Roe& Oomnds6donsr
iwoau of Labor Wathdiiop
Austin, rexaa A
Da* Nrr aeeiLt ,, : Opinion b'o. 0-3300
8omo court
ootfully adviocd that a three-judge istrict Court $01' the L;CrtIICPD Dis- as Ditioion, in tho cas3 OS Zlanley v. did hold the law invalid in the ro- ou, in the Sollowin:: 1c.iqu~~3t "It loom to us that cc;ctFon 4 is re:x?g- aant to the CoilstitutSon Of both the stat0 alld tha lll&tiOA. UililJr ito t3PZ3 Gil0 ChO furni&os trons~Orta~i0~ to olovcn or 12zo unmployod in&bbitirnts of Texas, that 2zc!y may work Sn OWQ othsr stato, is not portit-, *2 .--- -.
tcb to n11+0 his oti contr;rat. Uo ifi roqtirc43 to e;zvo a bond that ho vi11 f'umiLsh to oath OP smh laborrs,rcturn trans:xu%&.,ion. This not otiy applies to the onploymnt aeont, but it likowim appkios to th3 omployerr Wo 7Bmv of ao povor in oi$hor tho national or state l~~islativo bodies to oopi~?~l an inilividual oitima to mnkci nay particular sort of a coa-. .'.
tract. It ma hardly b0 dofon9ad uimn tho thaory that t;ha unon~ployti oitlzca Is [50] holy leso cad so mui&nbo~o or below Oonstitution.al guarantieti that +% and tho x&n uho assists h3.m ,in 66CW”6& Work tAU3t 0Ater bItnfo an nL;i’aomOnt 08 pPo?ibd by law, othomlso tho unomplayod mt rolnin unozplopd. Tho @xmral right to IX&O a oontroct tn relation to one*s business is a part of the liberty g-0tOoto;l by th3 Pour- teoath dmcndmoat . 00th tho Fifth aml !J'our- tooath &on&ntmts rcoo,g~Izo libortg and prapoz-ty aa ooedatont huxmn rl&te ati the ‘state is lx%+ with elthor.* from uauarrsurtclf intori?orenoe rd