Opinion ID: 1104877
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The Compact Violates Florida's Public Policy on Gaming

Text: Article II, section 3 of the Florida Constitution prohibits the executive branch from usurping the powers of another branch. Enacting lawsand especially criminal lawsis quintessentially a legislative function. See State v. Barquet, 262 So.2d 431, 433 (Fla.1972) (The lawmaking function is the chief legislative power.). By authorizing the Tribe to conduct banked card games that are illegal throughout Floridaand thus illegal for the Tribethe Compact violates Florida law. See Chiles v. Children A, B, C, D, E, & F, 589 So.2d 260, 264 (Fla.1991) (This Court has repeatedly held that, under the doctrine of separation of powers, the legislature may not delegate the power to enact laws or to declare what the law shall be to any other branch.). The Governor's action therefore encroaches on the legislative function and was beyond his authority. Nor does it matter that the Compact is a contract between the State and the Tribe. Neither the Governor nor anyone else in the executive branch has the authority to execute a contract that violates state criminal law. Cf. Local No. 234, United Assoc. of Journeymen & Apprentices of Plumbing & Pipefitting Industry v. Henley & Beckwith, Inc., 66 So.2d 818, 821 (Fla.1953) ([A]n agreement that is violative of a provision of a constitution or a valid statute, or an agreement which cannot be performed without violating such a constitutional or statutory provision, is illegal and void.); City of Miami v. Benson, 63 So.2d 916, 923 (Fla.1953) (The contract in question, that is, the acceptance by the City of the proposal made by its agent, employee or advisor, to purchase the bonds, is contrary to public policy and is, therefore, void.).