Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Court Rules Three Judge Panel topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee backs change allowing parties to ask three‑judge panel to decide constitutional questions
Summary
Senator Bridal told the committee the second substitute to SJR 6 removes language reserving requests to move constitutional questions to the three‑judge panel to only the attorney general, governor or legislature, allowing any party to seek such review. The committee moved and favorably recommended the substitute unanimously.
Senator Bridal told the House Rules Standing Committee on March 2 that the second substitute to Senate Joint Resolution 6 clarifies the limited scope originally intended and adds a procedural change: it removes language restricting requests to move constitutional questions to the three‑judge panel to only the attorney general, the governor or the legislature. "This simply strikes that and allows a party now to bring a question of constitution to the 3 judge panel," Bridal said.
Bridal said the original intent was a narrow clarification following last year’s medical malpractice-related legislation; the second substitute adds the provision on the three‑judge panel. The committee had no public comment and moved and favorably recommended the second substitute by unanimous voice votes.
The resolution proceeds with the committee’s recommendation.
