Opinion ID: 1280747
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: does an assembly concurrent resolution have the force and effect of nevada law?

Text: On March 3, 1969, the Nevada Legislature passed Assembly Concurrent Resolution No. 29, which states in relevant part: ASSEMBLY CONCURRENT RESOLUTION  Providing for state recognition of the Nevada State Employees' Association. WHEREAS, A substantial number of state employees are members of the Nevada State Employees' Association; and WHEREAS, The Nevada State Employees' Association should be recognized as representative of its members for purposes of preserving and advancing their interests as state employees; now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Assembly of the State of Nevada, the Senate concurring, That the legislature of the State of Nevada expresses its sense that the personnel division of the department of administration should recognize the Nevada State Employees' Association as representative of its members for discussion of conditions of employment, hours and wages, while at the same time preserving the right of state employees who are not members of such association to speak for themselves. A.Con.Res. 29, 55th Leg.Sess., 1969 Statutes of Nevada 1731. The federal appeals court considered this concurrent resolution in the underlying lawsuit between the litigants. We now hold that this resolution, like other similar concurrent resolutions, does not have the force and effect of Nevada law. First, by its nature, an assembly concurrent resolution is not intended to have the force and effect of law. Pursuant to Rule 7 of the Joint Rules of the Nevada Senate and Assembly, the purpose of a concurrent resolution is to direct the Legislative Commission to conduct interim studies, to request the return of a bill from the other house, and to request an enrolled bill from the Governor. On occasion, a concurrent resolution is also used to memorialize a former member of the Legislature or other distinguished person upon death, or to congratulate or commend any person or organization for a significant and meritorious accomplishment. Second, [e]very bill which may have passed the legislature shall, before it becomes a law, be presented to the governor.... NEV. CONST. art. IV, § 35. A review of the legislative history of the aforementioned Assembly Concurrent Resolution, No. 29, indicates that this resolution, like other concurrent resolutions passed by the legislature during the same time period, was never presented to the Governor for approval or disapproval. See generally FINAL VOLUME ASSEMBLY HISTORY, 1969 at 218-288. Accordingly, this assembly concurrent resolution cannot be construed as the law of this State. Finally, [t]he enacting clause of every law shall be as follows: `The People of the State of Nevada, represented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows,' and no law shall be enacted except by bill.  NEV. CONST. art. IV, § 23. (Emphasis added.) We have previously ruled that this enacting clause is mandatory and must be included in every law created by the Legislature. See State v. Rogers, 10 Nev. 250 (1875). Since Concurrent Resolution, No. 29 and other similar resolutions do not contain the requisite enactment language, they cannot represent the law of this State.