srothstein wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 4:26 pm
Rafe wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 3:29 pm
Not unexpectedly, Harris County Judge Hidalgo has been sued over yesterday's mandatory face mask order. Per the Houston Chronicle article linked below:
Hotze...said in a petition filed in state district court that the mask rule is at odds with a provision of the Constitution that gives the Legislature "exclusive authority to define crimes and to designate the punishments for those crimes." The petition also contends that Hidalgo cannot issue more restrictive orders than Abbott, who has not mandated that Texans wear masks in public.
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/h ... 221364.php
On the first point they will lose. The legislature defined the crime. I did find that in chapter 418 when I read the code.
Way above my pay grade, but I did see something odd that I can't explain. Seems the local government jurisdiction is pretty much spelled out in GC 418.108, and I guess items (f) and (g) apply here, with (g) including language that pretty much mirrors 418.018: "The county judge or the mayor of a municipality may control ingress to and egress from a disaster area under the jurisdiction and authority of the county judge or mayor and control the movement of persons and the occupancy of premises in that area." I guess "control the movement of persons" includes
how they can move, as in I suppose even if they must be wearing CDC-approved hazmat suits and clown shoes.
Probably not applicable, but what's odd is 418.108(i): "A declaration under this section may include a restriction that exceeds a restriction authorized by Section 352.051, Local Government Code." And it goes on to say that the exceeding restriction can last for only 60 hours unless an extension is granted by the governor. What's odd is that LGC Chapter 352 is "County Fire Protection" and 352.051 is "Regulation of Restricted Fireworks." Neither the word disaster or governor is mentioned in LGC 352 anywhere and the word emergency only 12 times, none related to anything resembling a disaster declaration and not in 352.051.
At least I don't think I'm reading it wrong. I'm looking at
https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs ... GV.418.htm and
https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs ... LG.352.htm. Is this an error in GC 418 or just another one of those legal-language oddities? I know it doesn't mean anything in the topic context, but why would a 60-hour extension of local fireworks regulations be put expressly in 418.108 and require approval by the governor to go beyond 60 hours? I mean, LGC 352.051 already includes "the commissioners court of the county by order may prohibit or restrict the sale or use of restricted fireworks in the unincorporated area of the county" so it's a bit baffling why the sale or use of "skyrockets with sticks" and "missiles with fins" would be something to be called out in statutes related to the declaration of local disasters. Just another bit of the code that keeps me
Thanks, Steve! And that motivates me to think about finding someplace, maybe in the Transportation Code, to write a bill to include a special increase in penalties for any motor vehicle attempting to cross a drawbridge when the bridge is in the raised position: https://darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin2019-02.html. 
