The goal of Death Star is simple.

The goal of Death Star is simple. The deeply conservative Texas Legislature wants to effectively deny cities—the state’s large Democratic-leaning cities, Houston, San Antonio, and Austin in particular—the ability to pass local laws and regulations in eight major policy areas: agriculture, business and commerce, finance, insurance, labor, natural resource law, occupational law, and property law. And it does all this in a bill that is 10 single-spaced pages long, nearly one page of which is legislative findings, not actual law. Which is where the problems begin.

Death Star does not aim to affirmatively lay out regulations at the state level; it simply attempts to thwart local regulations. Thus, the entirely of the provision that denies local governments the ability to regulate the insurance industry is just this: “Unless expressly authorized by another statute, a municipality or county may not adopt, enforce, or maintain an ordinance, order, or rule regulating conduct in a field of regulation that is occupied by a provision of this code. An ordinance, order, or rule that violates this section is void, unenforceable, and inconsistent with this code.” That’s it. It then repeats this language across all the various other fields, although in a few cases it adds an extra clause or two to identify specific subfields it really wants to make sure are preempted.

The party of small government strikes again!

    • LifeCoach5K@lemm.ee
      27·
      1 year ago

      I believe this also kills the mandatory water breaks in Dallas for construction workers due to this BS. Someone please fact check me if I’m wrong.

      • FarFarAway@kbin.social
        18·
        1 year ago

        Not just dallas, but Houston and Austin, as well. San antonio was about to follow suit, until this passed.

    • sim_@beehaw.org
      15·
      1 year ago

      I know at least one: the state GOP took umbrage with a police oversight act that Austin passed in May.

      Edit: actually, the “Death Star” bill didn’t concern this. There was separate legislature proposed to block city-specific police oversight but it was unsuccessful thankfully.

    • burntbutterbiscuits@sh.itjust.works
      8·
      1 year ago

      It is too unconstitutionally vague and it is impossible to know which regulations would be affected other than the few specific ones mentioned in the bill.

      • edric@lemm.ee
        4·
        1 year ago

        It’s so they can apply it to anything they want and make exceptions for the things they don’t want to be affected.

    • TWeaK@lemm.eeEnglish
      8·
      1 year ago

      In general the law is very vague, and apparently exactly what it covers will have to be argued in court. However if the city loses it will have to pay the other side’s costs, while if it wins it will still pay its own fees unless the lawsuit is particularly frivilous.

      Apparently there are some sections defined, eg over animal regulations (no doubt heavily in favour of the farming industry), but most of it leaves it completely open to interpretation. Interpretation that private interest groups can sue over, with the city paying.

      • TWeaK@lemm.eeEnglish
        7·
        1 year ago

        Potentially, it isn’t clear, but if someone sued the city would have to argue it in court.

        If the city wins, they only get their legal expenses back if the suit is frivilous. If the city loses, they pay the claimants costs and legal expenses.

        This law was written to make money for lawyers.

    • agent_flounder@lemmy.one
      2·
      1 year ago

      I’m not sure if anyone quite knows the entire scope of this law’s impact. But I’m not in TX and just trying to wrap my head around all this from the distant lands of Colorado with limited time.

      HB 2127 will not allow local governments to have more strict regulations when it comes to business and commerce. Some local rules that will be removed by the bill include mandatory water breaks for construction workers, eviction moratoriums and protections against predatory lending

      The bill is generally broad and a City of Austin spokesperson told KXAN it could take years before the full extent of the law is known.

      When it comes to the city of Round Rock, this section of the law will have an impact. … In 2018, the city passed an ordinance that created requirements a business had to meet to commercially sell pets.

      https://www.newsnationnow.com/us-news/southwest/death-star-texas-law-to-impact-pet-sales/

      Houston:

      In Houston, the law would overturn local ordinances regulating tow-truck companies, outdoor music festivals, noise regulations and boarding homes, Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner said at a Monday press conference. But the full extent of what local laws would become illegal remains unclear.

      Abbott and business lobbying groups, particularly the National Federation of Independent Business, have long pushed for a wide-ranging law like HB 2127 that negates city rules like mandated water breaks and paid sick leave ordinances in Austin, Dallas and San Antonio — which courts had prevented from taking effect.

      In recent years, lawmakers have passed laws to prevent cities and counties from requiring landlords to rent to tenants with federal housing vouchers or regulating fracking within their limits. If cities and counties want to raise property taxes a certain amount each year or rein in their police budgets, they have to get voter approval under legislation approved in the past few years. Local governments can no longer enact mask mandates or require schools or businesses to close if there’s a COVID-19 outbreak under a new law passed this year.

      https://www.texastribune.org/2023/07/03/houston-texas-lawsuit-local-control/

      Ft Worth…

      House Bill 3921 exemplifies the changes proposed in both the House and Senate. It would have obliterated zoning for existing residential neighborhoods. It would have allowed changes that would permanently alter neighborhoods enjoyed by Fort Worth residents.

      House Bill 3526, which states that “a municipality may not apply building codes to the construction of a solar pergola,” an outdoor awning or covering using solar panels.

      Read more at: https://www.star-telegram.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/other-voices/article277266483.html#storylink=cpy

      [Ft Worth City attorney Leann] Guzman, who has been with the attorney’s office for nearly 20 years, said her staff has tried to go through and “scrub our city code” to see where Fort Worth might be vulnerable to a lawsuit.

      Read more at: https://www.star-telegram.com/opinion/editorials/article277505038.html#storylink=cpy