Opinion ID: 2523441
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Single Subject Clause

Text: We first address the trial court's ruling that Indiana Code section 31-40-1-2(f) is unconstitutional under Article 4, Section 19 of the Indiana Constitution, which limits legislative acts to one subject. Article 4, Section 19 states, An act, except an act for the codification, revision or rearrangement of laws, shall be confined to one subject and matters properly connected therewith. The 2009 First Special Session of the 116th General Assembly passed P.L. 182-2009, An Act to amend the Indiana Code concerning State and local administration and to make an appropriation, which amended Indiana Code section 31-40-1-2(f) to its present reading. Indiana Code section 31-40-1-2(f) relates to the state budget and reads, The department is not responsible for payment of any costs or expenses for housing or services provided to or for the benefit of a child placed by a juvenile court in a home or facility located outside Indiana, if the placement is not recommended or approved by the director of the department or the director's designee. Ind.Code § 31-40-1-2(f) (2010 Supp.) Public Law 182-2009ss, Sec. 387 added is not recommended or approved by the director of the department or the director's designee, replacing the previous language, does not comply with the conditions stated in I.C. § 31-34-20-1(b) or I.C. § 31-37-19-3(b). The amendment to Indiana Code section 31-40-1-2(f) addresses appropriations, namely, whether DCS is financially responsible for the placement of a juvenile. This amendment relates to the other items in the bill. The amendment to Indiana Code section 31-40-1-2(f) relates to appropriations and the state budget and does not violate Article 4, Section 19 of the Indiana Constitution limiting acts to one subject.