BILL ANALYSIS |
C.S.H.B. 4103 |
By: Guillen |
Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence |
Committee Report (Substituted) |
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Interested parties have noticed that state law provides insufficient guidance as to whether a judge reappointed by operation of law is required to retake and retain the oath of office. The parties contend that if this confusion remains unresolved and is litigated, the state and its cities could be responsible for a considerable amount of money. C.S.H.B. 4103 seeks to clarify this issue.
|
||||||||
CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision.
|
||||||||
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.
|
||||||||
ANALYSIS
C.S.H.B. 4103 amends the Government Code to authorize a judge of a municipal court not reappointed by the 91st day following the expiration of a term of office who continues to serve for another term of office to continue to perform the duties of the office without taking an additional oath or affirmation otherwise required under the Texas Constitution. The bill's provisions apply to a judge of a municipal court who serves in office before, on, or after the bill's effective date.
|
||||||||
EFFECTIVE DATE
September 1, 2015.
|
||||||||
COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL AND SUBSTITUTE
While C.S.H.B. 4103 may differ from the original in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following comparison is organized and formatted in a manner that indicates the substantial differences between the introduced and committee substitute versions of the bill.
|
||||||||
|