Court Opinion

ID: 9726833
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 13:10:15.14274+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:25:31.188968
License: Public Domain

HANSON, J.
(dissenting).
I am unable to concur. Our constitution requires the subject of every law to be expressed in its title. The function of a title is to give reasonable notice of the subject of an act to legislators and the general public. In other words an expressive title to a legislative act should serve as an informative “label” of its contents. In my opinion the title in question fails to -serve that purpose or function. “An Act En*605titled, An Act relating to regulation as to use of motor vehicles upon the highways of this state and exempting from liability the party administering such chemical tests” is to me nothing more than a meaningless hodge-podge of words. It is devoid of information. Certainly, it would not alert the average reader that “Any person who operates any vehicle in this state shall be deemed to have given his consent to a chemical analysis of his blood, urine, breath or other bodily substance for the purpose o.f determining the amount of alcohol in his blood.” as provided in the body of the act. Something obviously was omitted from the challenged title and it is not the function of judicial interpretation to supply that omission. Our purpose is “to construe” and not “to construct” legislative titles.