Anyone?The supreme

court provided mandamus alleviation in In re: Durnin, No. 21-0170 (March 2, 2021), which challenged the ballot language concerning an Austin regulation pertaining to “camping in public rooms, sitting and lying down on public sidewalks, and also the hostile solicitation of money.”

In a majority point of view by Justice Blacklock, the Court observed: ” [I] t is not the courts’ work to micromanage the syntax of tally propositions. Our task is to guarantee voters are not misled by errors or product noninclusions in the proposition while preserving the regulating body’s discretion to pick ballot language.” That said, it discovered that the proposition “is unreliable and also deceptive in one crucial regard: “The proposition states that the regulation produces a crime as well as a penalty ‘for any person resting or resting on a public walkway’ in the midtown or UT-Austin location. Although the ordinance does criminalize some circumstances of resting or lying down on a sidewalk, by utilizing words “any individual,” the suggestion provides the impact that the ordinance criminalizes all instances of resting or existing down on a pathway. That is not real.”

Justice Boyd, joined by Justices Devine and Busby, would go better and also dissented: “Based on the plain language of the City of Austin’s charter, I would certainly grant relators alleviation by needing the city to mention the caption consisted of in the voters’ qualified request as the proposition on the tally.”

Released at Wed, 03 Mar 2021 16:57:12 +0000

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.