Bradley's contention founders upon the clear text of the statute. This specific textual provision of the statute precludes Bradley's proposal to apply all justice court rules and all rules of civil procedure. The interpretation of the statute that the State urges suffers from its own flaws. The Court should not be constrained to choose the lesser of the evils presented by the parties. Instead, the statute's unavoidable incongruities and ambiguities lead me to conclude, as Bradley argues in the alternative, that it is unconstitutionally vague.
Vague laws offend several important values.
In order to avoid these dangers, the Due Process Clause requires that laws be reasonably clear. Connally v. General Constr. Although the vagueness standard applies most frequently to penal statutes, a civil statute may also be so vague that it violates due process. See A.B. Small Co. v. American Sugar Ref. In the case of this statute, the Court should consider that few actors deserve more clarity than elected officials who can be removed from office at the hands of other competing elected officials.