Opinion ID: 1370501
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: state preemption of local laws

Text: 1. The doctrine of state preemption is based on the concept that statutes of the state legislature control over county ordinances. [2] Generally preemption is based on legislative intent. [3] Under federal law, for example, Congress may express an intent to preempt state law by expressly defining the area of preemption, extensively regulating an area so that preemption may be inferred, or enacting a law that directly conflicts with state law. [4] Similarly, state law may preempt local law expressly, by implication, or by conflict. [5] The Georgia Constitution historically addressed the concept of preemption in the uniformity clause. In both the 1945 and 1976 Constitutions, the uniformity clause stated: Laws of a general nature shall have uniform operation through the State, and no special law shall be enacted in any case for which provision has been made by existing general law. [6] This Court interpreted that provision in two ways, as a preemption rule and as a conflict rule. [7] Under the preemption analysis, the provision meant that once the legislature entered a field by enacting a general law, that field must thereafter be reserved exclusively to general legislation and could not be open to special or local laws. [8] Under the conflict analysis, this Court construed the same provision as prohibiting special laws only when there was a genuine conflict with a general law. [9] Based on these differing interpretations, it was unclear whether the uniformity clause preempted any special or local law when the state had passed a general law on the subject or whether it merely prohibited conflicts between general and local laws. [10] To resolve the confusion in our case law, the drafters of the 1983 Constitution revised the uniformity clause. [11] Although one committee considered adopting the conflicts rule and granting concurrent jurisdiction to local governing authorities on any matter, [12] it ultimately rejected that approach. [13] Instead, the committee recommended adopting an exception to the general rule of preemption to permit local governments to have concurrent jurisdiction with the state to exercise certain police powers in areas of concern to both. [14] The Legislative Oversight Committee adopted the exception, and voters ratified it. [15] 2. The uniformity clause in the 1983 Georgia Constitution now provides: Laws of a general nature shall have uniform operation throughout this state and no local or special law shall be enacted in any case for which provision has been made by an existing general law, except that the General Assembly may by general law authorize local governments by local ordinance or resolution to exercise police powers which do not conflict with general laws. [16] The clause's first provision follows the preemption rule of previous constitutions by precluding local or special laws when general laws exist on the same subject. Under this provision, preemption may be express or implied. [17] The clause's second provision provides for an exception to the general rule of preemption when general law authorizes the local government to act and the local ordinance does not conflict with general law. We have concluded that there was no conflict when the local law did not impair the general law's operation but rather augmented and strengthened it. [18]