- cross-posted to:
- dfw@lemmy.world
- politics@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- dfw@lemmy.world
- politics@lemmy.world
The goal of Death Star is simple. The deeply conservative Texas Legislature wants to effectively deny cities—the state’s large Democratic-leaning cities, Houston, San Antonio, and Austin in particular—the ability to pass local laws and regulations in eight major policy areas: agriculture, business and commerce, finance, insurance, labor, natural resource law, occupational law, and property law. And it does all this in a bill that is 10 single-spaced pages long, nearly one page of which is legislative findings, not actual law. Which is where the problems begin.
Death Star does not aim to affirmatively lay out regulations at the state level; it simply attempts to thwart local regulations. Thus, the entirely of the provision that denies local governments the ability to regulate the insurance industry is just this: “Unless expressly authorized by another statute, a municipality or county may not adopt, enforce, or maintain an ordinance, order, or rule regulating conduct in a field of regulation that is occupied by a provision of this code. An ordinance, order, or rule that violates this section is void, unenforceable, and inconsistent with this code.” That’s it. It then repeats this language across all the various other fields, although in a few cases it adds an extra clause or two to identify specific subfields it really wants to make sure are preempted.
The party of small government strikes again!
You must log in or register to comment.
The deeply conservative Texas Legislature
Correction: they are christofascists.
Party of Small Government, right here folks!
Surely it has to be unconstitutional to create a law which essentially inhibits local governments from actually governing in major aspects of the law?
Or is that the intention… To have it be challenged, and then sent up to the now rather right-biased SCOTUS and make it a precedent?
According to the lawsuits filed against this law, it’s explicitly against the Texas constitution.
The article says that the Federal government provides no protection between State and County or City. Texas specifically may have law prohibiting this new law, but that’s only because the new law is too broad and too vague. That might not stop other states from implementing the law successfully, however.
It won’t go to SCOTUS, it’s all at the state level. Unless someone comes up with a US constitutional angle, or something.
It won’t go to SCOTUS, it’s all at the state level. Unless someone comes up with a US constitutional angle, or something.
to add to this: state lawmakers (especially texas) goes out of their way to make sure that there’s nothing in these proposals that could service as excuse for the federal gov’t to get involved because the state courts usually do what the state legislature wants.
The TX Constitution is extremely malleable. Amendments are routine, and they use them in places other states would use normal legislation.
Yet another clear example of why I have no intention to ever live in, visit, or do business in that hell-hole of a state.
Small government utopia has higher taxes than California.
Anyone know what regulations they’re trying to nullify?
I believe this also kills the mandatory water breaks in Dallas for construction workers due to this BS. Someone please fact check me if I’m wrong.
Not just dallas, but Houston and Austin, as well. San antonio was about to follow suit, until this passed.
I know at least one: the state GOP took umbrage with a police oversight act that Austin passed in May.
Edit: actually, the “Death Star” bill didn’t concern this. There was separate legislature proposed to block city-specific police oversight but it was unsuccessful thankfully.
In general the law is very vague, and apparently exactly what it covers will have to be argued in court. However if the city loses it will have to pay the other side’s costs, while if it wins it will still pay its own fees unless the lawsuit is particularly frivilous.
Apparently there are some sections defined, eg over animal regulations (no doubt heavily in favour of the farming industry), but most of it leaves it completely open to interpretation. Interpretation that private interest groups can sue over, with the city paying.
It is too unconstitutionally vague and it is impossible to know which regulations would be affected other than the few specific ones mentioned in the bill.
It’s so they can apply it to anything they want and make exceptions for the things they don’t want to be affected.
Would this affect the water conservation and plastic bag laws in Austin?
Potentially, it isn’t clear, but if someone sued the city would have to argue it in court.
If the city wins, they only get their legal expenses back if the suit is frivilous. If the city loses, they pay the claimants costs and legal expenses.
This law was written to make money for lawyers.
I’m not sure if anyone quite knows the entire scope of this law’s impact. But I’m not in TX and just trying to wrap my head around all this from the distant lands of Colorado with limited time.
HB 2127 will not allow local governments to have more strict regulations when it comes to business and commerce. Some local rules that will be removed by the bill include mandatory water breaks for construction workers, eviction moratoriums and protections against predatory lending
The bill is generally broad and a City of Austin spokesperson told KXAN it could take years before the full extent of the law is known.
When it comes to the city of Round Rock, this section of the law will have an impact. … In 2018, the city passed an ordinance that created requirements a business had to meet to commercially sell pets.
https://www.newsnationnow.com/us-news/southwest/death-star-texas-law-to-impact-pet-sales/
Houston:
In Houston, the law would overturn local ordinances regulating tow-truck companies, outdoor music festivals, noise regulations and boarding homes, Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner said at a Monday press conference. But the full extent of what local laws would become illegal remains unclear.
Abbott and business lobbying groups, particularly the National Federation of Independent Business, have long pushed for a wide-ranging law like HB 2127 that negates city rules like mandated water breaks and paid sick leave ordinances in Austin, Dallas and San Antonio — which courts had prevented from taking effect.
In recent years, lawmakers have passed laws to prevent cities and counties from requiring landlords to rent to tenants with federal housing vouchers or regulating fracking within their limits. If cities and counties want to raise property taxes a certain amount each year or rein in their police budgets, they have to get voter approval under legislation approved in the past few years. Local governments can no longer enact mask mandates or require schools or businesses to close if there’s a COVID-19 outbreak under a new law passed this year.
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/07/03/houston-texas-lawsuit-local-control/
Ft Worth…
House Bill 3921 exemplifies the changes proposed in both the House and Senate. It would have obliterated zoning for existing residential neighborhoods. It would have allowed changes that would permanently alter neighborhoods enjoyed by Fort Worth residents.
House Bill 3526, which states that “a municipality may not apply building codes to the construction of a solar pergola,” an outdoor awning or covering using solar panels.
Read more at: https://www.star-telegram.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/other-voices/article277266483.html#storylink=cpy
[Ft Worth City attorney Leann] Guzman, who has been with the attorney’s office for nearly 20 years, said her staff has tried to go through and “scrub our city code” to see where Fort Worth might be vulnerable to a lawsuit.
Read more at: https://www.star-telegram.com/opinion/editorials/article277505038.html#storylink=cpy
Likely almost all of them.
deleted by creator
The tone-deafness of calling their shitty law “Death Star” is so funny that it’s un-funny.
edit: I guess I didn’t read it carefully enough. My bad, y’all.
They watched Star Wars and sided with the empire.
The empire is just trying to bring order to a chaotic galaxy of stupid aliens who just need to be taught how to be better, like the white-skinned humans.
The most telling thing about the sequels is that they decided to make the
Empirenew order less racist and sexist than in the EU.Gotta make sure the megalomaniacal fascist states are inclusive!
Omg, why am I just realizing the empire is all humans?
They’re literally meant to be space Nazis haha. Right down to the uniforms and flags. TLJ when Donal Gleason’s character is giving a speech was very heavy-handed with it. These guys sided with the space Nazis!
Domhnall Gleeson. TIL he was a Weasley :) I had no idea that was him.
Oops haha. Accidentally merged his name with Donal Logue. Yep, Domhnall played Bill! Him and his dad were in HP. Brendan is such a great actor, too. In Bruges is easily a top 10 movie for me! Domnhall killed it in Ex Machina and Black Mirror, as well.
I think that’s the nickname given it by their opponents. But the moniker is appropriate.
was given a much zippier name by its opponents…
They didn’t, the sane people did.
It’s the opponents of the law that gave it that name.
Ok, proposal, an executive order by Biden that nullifies any state law that nullifies any city or municipal law. Call it “Death Star, but like the bigger one from ROTJ”.
Absolutely illegal and unconstitutional, not to mention stupid (red cites in blue states). But I really want to see:
“Executive Order 14107 of August 30, 2023
Death Star, bigger but worse”Executive order 66…
Seriously how did I miss that.
Executive Order 1701-A The Doomsday Machine.
“Small government” unless you don’t agree with them, then fuck you here comes big brother.
Austin should secede from Texas.
Germany 1938, where have you been??
It’s been among us all along!
It’s calling from inside the state!
Why tf is this called death star
Because it enables the state of Texas to unilaterally wipe out any regulation or law passed by its city governments that it doesn’t like.
I don’t think an anti democratic law and a planet destroying weapon are comparable and tacking pop culture references to politics is supremely cringe and distasteful
I think maybe you’re focusing on the wrong thing to complain about. But that’s just my opinion.
It’s not even a good allegory. If the topic was a destructive military event maybe it would be acceptable. But calling a law ‘death star’ is just ridiculous. You can’t just group things into good things and bad things and pick the most recognizable bad thing to represent what you want to talk about. Words have meanings and there should be a corrolation between the severity and theme of your subject and the allegory you use.
Everyone already knows how bad this is. Me complaining about a stupid law in another continent is not going to change anything. But it does piss me off when political clickbait is apparently so acceptable that I get an article about Texas attacking Austin with death star law on my feed.
Wait’ll you see what effect this ends up having on those cities, then decide how apt the comparison is.
