From the Texas Tribune: Analyzing 2020: The pandemic recession in Texas

A look at how the pandemic will impact the budget for the next biennial period.

- Click here for the article.

The Texas economy was one of the early victims of the coronavirus, as precautions like social distancing and staying close to home made it nearly impossible for many businesses to thrive. And in the interest of public health, a markets-oriented governor found himself stuck between fighting the spread of the coronavirus and keeping Texas businesses open to customers.

As the economy faltered, so did the underpinnings of the Texas state budget that depends on taxes and fees those businesses generate. The Legislature will return on the second Tuesday of January to figure out how to keep providing the services Texans want during a recession. Here are a few of my columns on the economy and the budget from the last year.

A fast drop for the Texas economy — and for the state budget

April 8: The pandemic's impact on the Texas economy is a full-on recession, state Comptroller Glenn Hegar said. And hard financial decisions will mark the next session of the Texas Legislature.

Reopening Texas during a pandemic, cautiously and slowly

April 28: Gov. Greg Abbott wants to reopen the state and to get the economy going. But he also wants to avoid widening the spread of the coronavirus. Texans are about to find out whether it's possible to have it both ways.


Splitting hairs in Texas, for politics and profit

May 8: The governor and other top Texas officials love promoting the rule of law, but they also love good politics. The civil disobedience of a Dallas beautician forced them to choose a favorite — and maybe hurry changes in pandemic policy.

In a few places in Texas, sales tax revenues have risen in the pandemic

June 15: When Texas stores closed and social distancing began at the beginning of the pandemic, sales naturally dropped. So did sales taxes, and local and state government revenues. But not everywhere, it turns out.

Coronavirus spreads to the Texas state budget

July 22: Now that the first official estimate of the coronavirus' effect on the Texas economy is out, the hard work starts. Legislators have to figure out which parts of the state budget to cut and which parts to keep.

Texans might be ready for casinos, but lawmakers aren’t convinced

Dec. 14: Casinos are making a serious run at Texas lawmakers, hoping to open up to five gaming destinations in a state that has resisted them for years. But gaming in Texas hasn't been expanded in almost three decades.

From the Texas Tribune: Supreme Court says challenge to Donald Trump’s plan to not count undocumented people in congressional reapportionment must wait

Texas could lose a seat for the first time ever if Trump's plan is allowed to go forward.

- Click here for the story.

The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a challenge to President Donald Trump’s authority to exclude undocumented immigrants when deciding the size of each state’s congressional delegation, saying it was premature to decide the question at this point.

The court’s unsigned opinion said the constitutional and legal questions surrounding such action should wait until it is clear whether Trump would be able to make good on his plan. It is unclear whether the Census Bureau can come up with the population figures Trump seeks before he leaves office.

“We express no view on the merits of the constitutional and related statutory claims presented,” the opinion said. “We hold only that they are not suitable for adjudication at this time.”

The three liberal justices disagreed and said the court should say now that Trump lacks authority.

From the TSHA: Mineral Rights and Royalties

An interesting aspect of land rights. 

- Click here for the article. 

Private title to all land in Texas emanates from a grant by the sovereign of the soil (successively, Spain, Mexico, the Republic of Texas, and the state of Texas). Under the laws of Spain and Mexico, mines and their metals or minerals did not pass by the ordinary grant of the land without express words of designation. In one of the earliest acts of the Congress of the Republic of Texas, this rule was adopted, and it was continued in force after Texas had become a state. A grantee of land before 1866 therefore had no interest in the minerals in the land unless that interest was expressly granted. By a provision of the state Constitution of 1866, which was carried over in substantially the same language into the constitutions of 1869 and 1876, the state released to the owner of the soil all mines and mineral substances therein. This constitutional provision had retrospective effect; the landowner was given complete ownership of the minerals in all lands that passed from the sovereign before the effective date of the Constitution of 1876.

The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act

This is the federal law at the center of the previous story.

For more on it.

- Wikipedia: CARES Act.

The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, also known as the CARES Act, is a $2.2 trillion economic stimulus bill passed by the 116th U.S. Congress and signed into law by President Donald Trump on March 27, 2020 in response to the economic fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. The spending primarily includes $300 billion in one-time cash payments to individual Americans (with most single adults receiving $1,200 and families with children receiving more), $260 billion in increased unemployment benefits, the creation of the Paycheck Protection Program that provides forgivable loans to small businesses with an initial $350 billion in funding (later increased to $669 billion by subsequent legislation), $500 billion in aid for large corporations, and $339.8 billion to state and local governments.

The original CARES Act proposal included $500 billion in direct payments to Americans, $208 billion in loans to major industry, and $300 billion in Small Business Administration loans. As a result of bipartisan negotiations, the bill grew to $2 trillion in the version unanimously passed by the Senate on March 25, 2020. It was passed by the House via voice vote the next day, and was signed into law by President Donald Trump on March 27. It was originally introduced in the U.S. Congress on January 24, 2019, as H.R. 748 (Middle Class Health Benefits Tax Repeal Act of 2019). To comply with the Origination Clause of the Constitution, the Senate then used H.R. 748 as a shell bill for the CARES Act, changing the content of the bill and renaming it before passing it.

Unprecedented in size and scope, the legislation is the largest economic stimulus package in U.S. history, amounting to 10% of total U.S. gross domestic product. The bill is larger than the $831 billion stimulus act passed in 2009 as part of the response to the Great Recession. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that it will add $1.7 trillion to the deficits over the 2020–2030 period, with nearly all the impact in 2020 and 2021.

Lawmakers refer to the bill as "Phase 3" of Congress's coronavirus response. The first phase "was an $8.3 billion bill spurring coronavirus vaccine research and development" (the Coronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2020), which was enacted on March 6, 2020. The second phase was "an approximately $104 billion package largely focused on paid sick leave and unemployment benefits for workers and families" (the Families First Coronavirus Response Act), which was enacted on March 18, 2020.

For more detail on the bill, click here.

From the Texas Tribune: Texas has $2 billion in COVID relief funds left to spend. Advocacy groups are anxiously watching.

A great example of cooperative federalism.

A few other items to note in this article: 

- Texas Agriculture Commissioner
- Texas Governor
- US Department of the Treasury
- Department of State Health Services
- Texas Division of Emergency Management
- legislative leaders
- state agencies
- housing advocacy groups
- Texas Housers
- cities

- Click here for the article.

With only two weeks before the funding expires, Texas’ state government still hasn’t spent about a quarter of the $8 billion it received from the federal coronavirus relief bill.

In March, the U.S. Department of the Treasury assigned $11.24 billion to local and state governments in Texas. Almost a third of that went directly to cities and counties with more than 500,000 people, which have been quick to use it for a wide range of measures, from rent assistance programs to temperature checks at city offices. The state distributed $1.85 billion to smaller jurisdictions and has been distributing the remaining $8 billion through its health, education and emergency agencies, among others.

The funds can pay for expenses incurred only until Dec. 30, according to federal guidelines. Gov. Greg Abbott’s office said that it will use the money by that deadline but would not give details on how.

“Governor Abbott has worked closely with legislative leaders and state agencies to allocate $6 billion so far, including an estimated $1.6 billion for [the Department of State Health Services] and [Texas Division of Emergency Management] to fund the state’s response through the end of the year,” said Renae Eze, a spokesperson for Gov. Greg Abbott, in a statement. “With $2 billion remaining of the original funding, the state will spend every dollar by the end of the year to ensure the health and well-being of all Texans.”

Unless the federal government decides to extend the Dec. 30 deadline, unspent funds will have to be returned to the Department of Treasury.

From The Texas Tribune: After voting for Donald Trump, Texas electors ask swing states to reject results that assured victory for Joe Biden

- Click here for the story.

The Electoral College on Monday affirmed former Vice President Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 presidential election, but not before Texas’ 38 electors delivered their votes for Donald Trump and defiantly urged the legislatures of four swing states to overrule the will of their voters and appoint their own electors.

The call from the Texas electors came in the form of a resolution they passed 34-4, but it had no impact on the results. The four states — Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia and Pennsylvania — had already cast their votes by that time, and soon after, California cast its 55 votes for Biden and pushed him over the 270 number he needed to win the presidency.

Nonetheless, the resolution continued the practice of many Texas Republicans of baselessly questioning Biden’s victory and claiming fraud.

The resolution also “condemn[ed] the lack of action by the U.S. Supreme Court” to overturn the election results. There was a brief debate among electors over whether they should keep language in the resolution denouncing members of the U.S. Supreme Court for “moral cowardice.” On Friday, the high court briskly rejected a lawsuit filed by Attorney General Ken Paxton that sought to overturn the election results and had become a vehicle for Republicans across the country to contest Biden’s victory.

From C-Span: Texas Electoral College Vote

 - Click here for it.

From Texas Election Code: TITLE 11. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS

- CHAPTER 191. SELECTION OF DELEGATES TO NATIONAL NOMINATING CONVENTION.

  - CHAPTER 192. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORS AND CANDIDATES.

From Wikipedia: Title 3 of the United States Code

All  about the election of the president, on the national level.

- Click here for the page.

§ 1. Time of appointing electors
§ 2. Failure to make choice on prescribed day
§ 3. Number of electors
§ 4. Vacancies in electoral college
§ 5. Determination of controversy as to appointment of electors
§ 6. Credentials of electors; transmission to Archivist of the United States and to Congress; public inspection
§ 7. Meeting and vote of electors
§ 8. Manner of voting
§ 9. Certificates of votes for President and Vice President
§ 10. Sealing and endorsing certificates
§ 11. Disposition of certificates
§ 12. Failure of certificates of electors to reach President of the Senate or Archivist of the United States; demand on State for certificate
§ 13. Same; demand on district judge for certificate
§ 14. Forfeiture for messenger's neglect of duty
§ 15. Counting electoral votes in Congress
§ 16. Same; seats for officers and Members of two Houses in joint meeting
§ 17. Same; limit of debate in each House
§ 18. Same; parliamentary procedure at joint meeting
§ 19. Vacancy in offices of both President and Vice President; officers eligible to act
§ 20. Resignation or refusal of office
§ 21. Definitions

For a look at US Code, click here.

From Wikipedia: Electoral Count Act

 - Click here for the entry.

The Electoral Count Act of 1887 Pub.L. 49–90, 24 Stat. 373 is a United States federal law establishing procedures for the counting of electoral votes by Congress following a presidential election. The law has subsequently been codified, with some modifications, into positive law in Title 3, Chapter 1 of the United States Code, which also contains other provisions related to presidential elections and vacancies. The law was enacted in the aftermath of the disputed 1876 presidential election, in which several states submitted competing slates of electors and a divided Congress was unable to resolve the deadlock.

The law has been criticized since it was enacted, with an early commenter describing it as "very confused, almost unintelligible.":643 Modern commenters have stated that the law "invites misinterpretation," observing that it is "turgid and repetitious" and that "[i]ts central provisions seem contradictory.":543 For example, one key ambiguity in Section 4 (now 3 U.S.C. § 15) involves a situation where multiple slates of electors are sent from a state, and the House and Senate cannot agree whether the law requires the slate certified by the governor to count, or requires that no slate should be counted.

From the National Conference of State Legislatures: The Electoral College in 2020

 Most of what you need to know.

- Click here for the page.

The following is a summary of how the Electoral College will work in the 2020 presidential election:

Spring and Summer 2020: Nomination of Electors. The political parties in each state nominate their electors. Parties and states have different ways of going about this, but a party's presidential electors are generally loyal or consistent party members. The parties want to be sure they can rely on their electors to cast their votes for the party's nominee for president.

Nov. 3, 2020: Election Day, when voters in each state will select their presidential electors. The names of electors are not on the ballot in most states. Rather, when a voter casts a vote for a presidential candidate, s/he is also casting a vote for the electors already selected by the party of that candidate. If a majority of voters in a state vote for the Republican candidate for president, the Republican slate of electors is elected. If a majority vote for the Democratic candidate, the Democratic slate of electors is chosen.

Dec. 8, 2020: Deadline for Resolving Election Disputes. All state recounts and court contests over presidential election results must be completed by this date. (3 U.S.C. § 5). For the majority of states the date of certification is the same as for all contests, but in eight states there is a deadline that either directly references 3 USC §5 or uses similar language, requiring that disputes surrounding the selection of presidential electors be resolved in time to meet the “safe harbor” deadline: Indiana, Iowa, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia. For detailed information on state post-election processes, please visit this page.

Dec. 14, 2020: Meeting of the Electors. The electors meet in each state and cast their ballots for president and vice president. Each elector votes on his or her own ballot and signs it. The ballots are immediately transmitted to various people: one copy goes to the president of the U.S. Senate (who is also the vice president of the United States); this is the copy that will be officially counted later. Other copies go to the state's secretary of state, the National Archives and Records Administration, and the presiding judge in the district where the electors meet (this serves as a backup copy that would replace the official copy sent to the president of the Senate if it is lost or destroyed).

Dec. 23, 2020: Deadline for Receipt of Ballots. The electors' ballots from all states must be received by the president of the Senate by this date. There is no penalty for missing this deadline.

Jan. 6, 2021: Counting of the Electoral Ballots. The U.S. Congress meets in joint session to count the electoral votes.

Jan. 20, 2021: Inauguration Day. The president-elect becomes the president of the United States.

The Common Law Part I: What is Common Law and What Role Did it Play in E...

Understanding the Common Law [No. 86 LECTURE]

From Wikipedia: Siete Partidas

One of the bases of Texas law.

- Click here for the entry.

Example: 

Part IV, Title XI, Law vii: Donations and Dowries, Made in Consideration of Marriage, Should Remain Under Control of the Husband, to Be Kept and Taken Care Of. A husband should place his wife in possession of the gift which he makes her, and the wife should do the same thing with her husband with regard to the dowry she gives; and, although each of them places the other in possession of their respective gifts, nevertheless, the husband should be the master and have control of all the property aforesaid, and be entitled to collect the income of the whole, including what the wife gives, as well as that given by him, for the purpose of supporting himself, his wife, and his family, and to preserve, defend, and protect the marriage well and faithfully. Still, the husband has no right to sell, dispose of, or waste the donation which he gave his wife, or the dowry which he receives from her, as long as the marriage lasts, except where such a gift has been appraised. This should be observed for the following reason, namely: in order that if a separation takes place, the property of each of the parties may be returned to them, free and without encumbrance, to dispose of at their pleasure, or, where the marriage is dissolved by death, that it may descend intact to their heirs.

Part IV, Title XI, Law xvii: Concerning Separate Property Belonging to the Wife, Which is Not Given as Dowry, and Which is Called in Latin, Paraphernalia. (return) All property and possessions, whether personal or real, which women keep separately for themselves, and do not enter in the account of a dowry, are called in Greek parapherna, and this derived its name from para, which means, in Greek, the same as near, and pherna which takes the place of dowry, in Greek, the same as things which are joined to, or connected with a dowry. All the articles called, in Greek, parapherna, when they are given by a wife to her husband with the intention that he shall have control of them as long as the marriage lasts, he has the right to keep, just as those which are given him by way of dowry. Where they are not specifically given to the husband, and it was not the intention of the wife that he should have control of them, she always remains their owner; and the same rule applies whenever any doubt arises whether she gave them to her husband or not.

All these things called parapherna, have the same privilege as a dowry has, for just as a husband is responsible to his wife to the full amount of his property, if he disposes of or wastes her dowry, he is also responsible for the parapherna, no matter what may happen to it. And although an obligation of this kind may not be contracted by words, it is understood to be created solely by the act itself. For as soon as the husband receives the dowry and the other property called parapherna, all his property, for this reason, becomes bound to his wife, not only what he has at the time, but also what he may acquire subsequently.

From the New York Times: Christopher Krebs, a fired Trump official, sues the campaign and the lawyer who said he should be shot.

Lawsuits in the works.

- Click here for the story.

The lawsuits alleges defamation and the infliction of emotional distress. What are they? Does he have a case?

Defamation:

In the United States a defamation action typically requires that a plaintiff claiming defamation prove that the defendant:
- made a false and defamatory statement concerning the plaintiff;
- shared the statement with a third party (that is, somebody other than the person defamed by the statement);
- if the defamatory matter is of public concern, acted in a manner which amounted at least to negligence - on the part of the defendant; and
caused damages to the plaintiff.

- United States defamation law.

Infliction of emotional distress: 

- From Wikipedia: Intentional infliction of emotional distress.

IIED was created in tort law to address a problem that would arise when applying the common law form of assault. The common law tort of assault did not allow for liability when a threat of battery was not imminent. A common case would be a future threat of harm that would not constitute common law assault, but would nevertheless cause emotional harm to the recipient. IIED was created to guard against this kind of emotional abuse, thereby allowing a victim of emotional distress to receive compensation in situations where he or she would otherwise be barred from compensation under the common law form.

Elements: 

- Defendant acted intentionally or recklessly; and
- Defendant's conduct was extreme and outrageous; and
- Defendant's act is the cause of the distress; and
- Plaintiff suffers severe emotional distress as a result of defendant's conduct.

Who is Chris Krebs? What is the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency?

Until recently, Krebs directed the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, and got into trouble with Trump for saying the elections were clean.

- Here's his Wikipedia entry. 

Career: 

- focus on cybersecurity and risk management issues.
- Senior Advisor to the Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security for Infrastructure Protection
- Director for Cybersecurity Policy for Microsoft.
- March 2017, he became Senior Counselor to the Secretary of Homeland Security.
- August 2017, he was appointed Assistant Secretary for Infrastructure Protection
- June 15, 2018, Under Secretary of Homeland Security for National Protection and Programs
- November 2018, became director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency 

- Here is the entry on the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. 

Formed in 2007, the National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD) was a component of the United States Department of Homeland Security. NPPD's goal was to advance the Department's national security mission by reducing and eliminating threats to U.S. critical physical and cyber infrastructure.

On November 16, 2018, President Trump signed into law the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Act of 2018, which elevated the mission of the former NPPD within DHS, establishing the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). CISA is a successor agency to NPPD, and assists both other government agencies and private sector organizations in addressing cybersecurity issues.

From The Texas Tribune: In new lawsuit, Texas contests election results in Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania

A look at the fight between national and state power.

Can the Texas Attorney General do this?

- Click here for the article. 

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is suing four battleground states — Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — whose election results handed the White House to President-elect Joe Biden.

In the suit, he claims that pandemic-era changes to election procedures in those states violated federal law, and asks the U.S. Supreme Court to block the states from voting in the Electoral College.

The last-minute bid, which legal experts have already characterized as a longshot, comes alongside dozens of similar attempts by President Donald Trump and his political allies. The majority of those lawsuits have already failed.

There is no evidence of widespread fraud in the 2020 election, officials in most states and U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr have said. Biden won in all four states where Paxton is challenging the results.

In a filing to the high court Tuesday, Paxton claims the four battleground states broke the law by instituting pandemic-related changes to election policies, whether “through executive fiat or friendly lawsuits, thereby weakening ballot integrity.”

Paxton claimed that these changes allowed for voter fraud to occur — a conclusion experts and election officials have rejected — and said the court should push back a Dec. 14 deadline by which states must appoint their presidential electors.

“That deadline, however, should not cement a potentially illegitimate election result in the middle of this storm,” attorneys for Texas wrote.

From the Texas Tribune: Texas enrollment and FAFSA applications down, as education leaders worry pandemic is disrupting college plans

For out look at public policy in Texas. How might the pandemic impact higher education in the state?

- Click here for the article.

The number of Texas high school seniors filling out the federal financial aid application for college, known as FAFSA, is down so far from last year, a sign worrying state higher education leaders that the COVID-19 pandemic is still disrupting many students’ pathway to college.

According to the National College Attainment Network’s FAFSA tracker, just 24% of Texas seniors have filled out the vital Free Application for Federal Student Aid as of Nov. 20, a 14.6% decline compared to the same time last year.

Preliminary enrollment data from the state shows this fall’s college enrollment was down 3%, or more than 47,000 students, primarily among community colleges.

The enrollment and application data was discussed at a Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board press conference, where officials said they are concerned that the pandemic is disproportionately affecting underrepresented students, including low-income students, Hispanic and Black students, and rural students.

Higher education leaders across Texas say high school counselors are struggling to connect with students virtually and students aren’t receiving the same information about college applications and financial aid that they would be if they were in school every day.

“A year ago it was really easy to find a high school senior in the hall at the school, but now the student may not even be in the building,” said John Fitzpatrick, executive director of the nonprofit Educate Texas, on a call with reporters Tuesday.

From the Texas Tribune: Despite staggering pandemic losses, Texas budget forecast better than expected, state comptroller says

For our look at Texas' plural executive

- Click here for the article.

Despite “historic declines,” state lawmakers will have more money to work with in the upcoming legislative session than Comptroller Glenn Hegar expected over the summer, he said Monday. But Hegar did not outline specifics as state coffers continue to suffer from the economic recession spurred by the coronavirus pandemic.

Sales tax revenues, by far the largest part of the state budget, fell by 4.8% in the second half of the 2020 fiscal year compared with the same stretch last year, Hegar said. It was a much softer hit than he anticipated, thanks to Texans staying home and spending money on “staycations instead of vacations.”

Other revenue streams, such as taxes related to alcohol, hotel occupancy, and oil and gas, were down more than 40% in the same period this year compared with last, Hegar told lawmakers Monday during a Legislative Budget Board meeting at the Capitol.

From the Texas Tribune: What went wrong with Texas Democrats' 2020 plans? State party leaders intend to find out.

 For our look at political parties in Texas.

- Click here for the article.

Texas Democrats severely underperformed expectations in the November election after looking to it as their best shot in decades at making inroads. President Donald Trump carried the state by 6 percentage points, U.S. Sen John Cornyn won reelection by 10 points, Democrats picked up zero U.S. House seats despite targeting 10 and their push to flip the state House fizzled as they gained one seat and lost another.

Democrats have since said they were misled by bad polling and lamented their decision to hold off on in-person campaigning during the coronavirus pandemic. Hinojosa cited both those factors in a letter responding to the executive committee members, while saying he agrees that a "complete analysis needs to be done on this to determine what really happened."

"The Party is committed to conducting a 'deep dive' analysis of the election, using outside persons or entities, and partnering with other allied groups to fund it if necessary," Hinojosa wrote.

The Tribune obtained a copy of the letter that was dated Friday. In it, the State Democratic Executive Committee members raise a host of issues related to the governing body's relationship with party staff — which appear to predate this election cycle — as well as the party's role in the November election.

Get our most ambitious reporting delivered straight to your inbox a couple times a wee

From Wikipedia: United States Marshals Service

I'm catching up on these guys. Among other things, they provide muscle for the judiciary. They date back to the Judiciary Act of 1789.

- Click here for the entry.

The United States Marshals Service (USMS) is a federal law enforcement agency in the United States. The USMS is a bureau within the U.S. Department of Justice, operating under the direction of the Attorney General, but serves as the enforcement arm of the United States federal courts to ensure the effective operation of the judiciary and integrity of the Constitution. It is the oldest U.S. federal law enforcement agency created by the Judiciary Act of 1789 during the presidency of George Washington as the "Office of the United States Marshal". The USMS as it stands today was established in 1969 to provide guidance and assistance to U.S. Marshals throughout the federal judicial districts.

The Marshals Service is primarily responsible for the protection of judges and other judicial personnel, the administration of fugitive operations, the management of criminal assets, the operation of the United States Federal Witness Protection Program and the Justice Prisoner and Alien Transportation System, the execution of federal arrest warrants, and the protection of senior government officials through the Office of Protective Operations. Throughout its history the Marshals have also provided unique security and enforcement services including protecting African-American students enrolling in the South during the civil rights movement, escort security for United States Air Force LGM-30 Minuteman missile convoys, law enforcement for the United States Antarctic Program, and protection of the Strategic National Stockpile.

From Vox: Religious conservatives have won a revolutionary victory in the Supreme Court

Also a product of a concerted movement.

- Click here for the article. 

For the past six years, the Supreme Court’s right flank has wanted to revolutionize the law governing so-called “religious liberty” cases, in which a plaintiff who objects to following a particular law on religious grounds seeks an exemption from that law.

Late on Thanksgiving eve, in a decision handed down while much of the country was already asleep, the Court made this vision a reality. Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo, a decision allowing some houses of worship to operate in defiance of New York state’s rules seeking to limit the spread of Covid-19, is one of the two most significant religion cases of the past 30 years, and may prove to be one of the most important religion decisions in the Court’s history.

New York state limited attendance at religious services in areas with coronavirus outbreaks to 10 people in areas with the most severe outbreaks, and to 25 people in areas where the state is concerned that a severe outbreak could occur. In a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court held that the state may not enforce these restrictions.

Roman Catholic Diocese marks a sea change in the Court’s approach to religious objectors, and it is an early sign of the significance of the late liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s replacement with conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett.

Under the old rules, religious objectors typically could not seek exemptions from the law if granting them an exemption could harm people who do not share their faith. And the old rules were much more concerned with preserving equality between secular and religious individuals than with giving special advantages to people of faith. In the business context, for example, the Court was primarily concerned with ensuring that religious business owners did not obtain legal exemptions that would give them a leg up over their competitors.

From the Texas Comptroller: TAX EXEMPTIONS AND TAX INCIDENCE REPORTS

If you are into the details of public finance, you are in luck.

- Click here.

From The Texas Standard: Report Says State Law Enforcement Commission Lacks Tools To Deal With Bad Cops

For 2306 and our look at the Sunset Advisory Commission.

- Click for the article.

A scathing state government report says the agency providing oversight for Texas law enforcement operations isn’t doing a very good job. 

According to The Houston Chronicle, a recently-released report by the Texas Sunset Advisory Commission notes the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement, or TCOL’s, inability to adequately train officers and keep so called bad apples out of the law enforcement job pipeline.

St. John Barned-Smith covers public safety for The Houston Chronicle. He told Texas Standard that though more than 600 Texas law enforcement officers received dishonorable discharges for misconduct last year, more than one-quarter were rehired as sworn officers.

Barned-Smith said the report found TCOL doesn’t have the powers it would need to prevent rehiring of fired officers.

“The TCOL is only allowed to revoke officers’ licenses in very rare circumstances,” Barned-Smith said.

For more.

- Sunset Advisory Commission.
- Report on Texas Commission on Law Enforcement.
- Agency website.