Court Opinion

ID: 9933990
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-09 18:42:46.570723+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:18:46.237316
License: Public Domain

I dissent in Part II of the majority opinion which classifies the increase in the legislator's expense allowance as a matter of the organization of the legislature. In my opinion the views expressed by Mr. Justice Lawson, dissenting, in In re Opinionof the Justices, 248 Ala. 590, 29 So.2d 10 (1947) are the proper ones and those which should guide the legislature in encompassing the restrictive and presumptive provisions of Amendment 57. Mr. Justice Lawson, at 248 Ala. 595, 29 So.2d 14, wrote:
 The restrictive provision is that at this organizational session the Legislature shall transact no business. The permissive features of the amendment are the exceptions to the restrictive provision. It appears clear to me that if the Constitution says that the Legislature shall transact no business except certain types specifically enumerated that it is without power to transact any other type of business. . . .
He further argued at 248 Ala. 597, 29 So.2d 16:
 Can it reasonably be argued that since the constitutional amendment does not say that an appropriation bill cannot be passed at this organizational session that such a bill could be passed?
I would, of course, answer the above question in the negative. For these reasons which are obviously as cogent today as they were when originally written, I respectfully dissent.
FAULKNER, J., concurs. *Page 1202