Case Information
*1 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN
HOnorable B0z44rLeOnard, 5p4aker
IfaUkS of Rapres4ntstlYet!l
Austin, Texas
ma Bill lo. tea thm ana4 aa wmmtutlona~~ty of thtr dor onlj th4 aoption there- I An Aet rlxl.q the In all oauntier lng l p c @uZItian of ummd two h undred fo rty enty-nlJk 4 thoua aml thr 4 4 reeocaing to th4 loot Lar r4peallng all law4
'Phis dopsrtasnt haa written mmqy opinionr holdiq that alaillar 81114, *ioh 444k to f&x the 44larles of Oopnty offleers In a p4rtleuloriLoounty, am in violsition of 54Otion Of Artiols 3 OF the State Conrtltution whItah provide4 ia, parts
Honorable Ho184r Leoasrd, Page 2 L4pSmlatur4 mhall not, 4xaopt am %4
othervl8e gmavlded in thlm 00Amt1totiatl, pa88 any local or mp4oial lav euthoriclngr
"Regulating the affrlrm of oountl4m, + l 4-n
Among our opinloo4 holding unconmtltutlonal minilmr Blllm aontalning populmtlon braokotm oi thlm typo, 6r4 Horn. O-2973, O-3040 and O-3417, aopI4m of whhh we 4n41080 hbmlth. In addition t0 the authoritlom 8it4d in th480 Opini0~8, we refer to the rooent 4amo of HO.lor, 4t ml v. County of El Pamo, et al, dealded on April P3, 1941, not yet report&, whomin Chlof Jus- tiso Al4xand4r doolandt
%e are th42MXw4 met at the outmet vlth a lav whloh, under faotm v411 kn4vn at th4 tiru of its adoption, vmm applicable only to a mingle aountfr Clearly th4n it 18 8 104al law and mumt fall am mu&, unlemm it mmn be fairly aad that the olasr 40 rnogmymtd by thm Aat is l mubmtentiel 4.lamm and ham &ar- aotorl8tla8 legltlaatmly dfmtingul8htng it frar the ~e884bd0~ or th4 ma0 80 68 t0 r4qtLre lbgimlatlon peoullar th4r4to. Iathlm %n6tana4 th4 ala88ifl4atlolr 18 mmd4 to nmt entirely on th4 populmtlon of th4 oounty and a city thsreis. Rooort to papulatlan bratScot8 for the pullpore of olammlfylng mub- jeotm for logimlmtion 18 pe~mmlble whom the l proad OS papulatlon im broad enough to lnalude OF megr6gato a 8ubmtmntlal alamm, end vhoro the population boars 8o1* r4al r4latlon to the l nbjoot of' l4glmlrtlon and afford6 e fair bmmlm Pas the ol888lfiaatlon.
It ham been 14gitirstoly 4m@oy4d in fixing Tcrem of offloom in oertaln 0am48 (Clark v. comptro114s, 93 Tea. 178), but even
Finl4y, then it ia pormlmrlblr only vhere th4 mpremd of populatLon im l ub8tm.nt~al and 18 8ufflaIont to lnoluds a real olamm vlth ahrraotorlmti68 which reamonably dimtingulmh it fWm Other8 mm appllod to the crant@qplatod &&Ii8latlon, and afford8 8 fair barn18 foor th4 olammifioa- Bexar Caunty v. rmSa, a. If. (24) tion.
46?.* *3 P-4
IIanar4bl4Hom4*L40n4~, It ia oup apiaion, therefore. 8umte Bin SO. that viol&mm Umotion 56 of As-tiole 3 of the f%nmtituthn of
Tmxmm.
Yours vary truly ATTORHRY - OF !cxAs