Posts Tagged ‘Mississippi’

2011 Southern indigent defense legislation

September 14th, 2011

Law

Alabama HB 601 / SB 440 Repeals all existing laws with respect to indigent defense. Redefines “indigent defendant.” Provides for the unified administration of indigent defense services by the state. Ends practice of providing for indigent defense through the local presiding circuit judge, commission, or governing body administering the system. Creates statewide Office of Indigent Defense Services within the Finance Department and indigent defense advisory boards in each judicial circuit.

Arkansas HB 1004 Prohibits payment of attorney’s fees of privately retained attorneys for indigent persons.

Arkansas HB 2207 Provides funding for public defenders may come from a county’s administration of justice, general, public defender, indigent defense, or public defender investigator fund(s), or any other fund authorized by law for that purpose. Requires expenditures comply with an itemized, line-item budget.

Louisiana HB 178 Authorizes Dept. of Children and Family Services to transfer funds appropriated pursuant to existing law to unspecified entities for representation of children and indigent parents in child protection proceedings. Removes require that funds go only to those entities specified in existing law.

Mississippi HB 1302 / SB 2563 Consolidates Office of Capital Defense Counsel, Office of Indigent Appeals and Division of Public Defender Training into Office of State Public Defender. Repeals provision that Circuit Court may appoint local counsel in capital cases at the expense of the Capital Defense Counsel Special Fund.

Mississippi HB 506 Permits all public defenders to carry firearms in courthouses. (See also HB 881)

Mississippi HB 332 / SB 2697 Extends Public Defender Task Force until 2014.

Texas HB 1754 / SB 170 Creates within judicial branch the Texas Indigent Defense Commission. Transfers all powers and duties of Task Force on Indigent Defense  to Commission and abolishes Task Force. Designates Commission a permanent standing committee of the Texas Judicial Council and administratively attached to the Office of Court Administration, but provides commission is to prepare, approve, and submit a Legislative Appropriations Request and maintain a budget structure separate from that of OCA. Establishes membership of governing board of the Commission. Sets sunset date for commission as September 2023. Requires certain indigent defense information to be submitted by November 1st of each odd numbered year. Requires each law school receiving innocence project funding to submit annual reports regarding exonerations in criminal cases. Amends the Code of Criminal Procedure relating to the creation of public defender’s offices. Defines and authorizes local jurisdictions to establish managed assigned counsel programs as strictly a local option that would require both the judges and county commissioners court assent to implement. Repeals the “Indigent Representation Fund”, the court costs for which serve as a revenue stream to the Fair Defense Account, which serves the same purpose.

Texas HB 3323 / SB 1308 Allows for the review of attorneys who are no longer eligible to represent indigent defendants in capital cases due to a single finding of ineffective counsel. Provides determination will be made by the Regional Selection Committee, which includes an administrative law judge, a district judge, a representative from the local bar association, and a board-certified criminal attorney.

Adopted Resolution

Texas HCR 22 (Special Session) Commends the members of the Texas Supreme Court for their actions in support of legal aid services and honors them for their work in promoting access to justice for the state’s most vulnerable citizens.

Active/Carried over into 2012

Oklahoma SB 868 Specifies Indigent Defense System is only for indigents who are in custody. Provides a court may appoint legal representation for an indigent who is not in custody, in which case costs for such representation shall be paid from the local court fund.

Oklahoma HB 2175 Restricts use of the Oklahoma Indigent Defense System to defendants who are in custody. Provides a definition for “unable to employ counsel”.

Tennessee HB 1225 / SB 1279 Provides that if an attorney, post-conviction defender or district public defender in a criminal case is found to have provided ineffective assistance of counsel, that attorney cannot receive any further state funds for legal services until the attorney obtains continuing education, counseling or training that addresses the reason for the attorney being ineffective.

Tennessee HB 1623 / SB 1574 Removes the requirement that the Executive Director of the District Public Defenders Conference (DPDC) administer the accounts of the judicial branch of government relating to the DPDC; prepare, approve, and submit budget estimates and appropriations necessary for the maintenance and operation of the offices of district public defenders; approve all requisitions for the payment of public moneys appropriated for the maintenance and operation of the judicial branch of government; audit claims, and prepare vouchers for payment; and provide the district public defenders with minimum law libraries.

Approved by one chamber

Louisiana SB 270 Provides 10% of revenue generated from abandoned cars sold by court as result of littering conviction go toward indigent defender board. Approved by full Senate and House Natural Resources and Environment committee. Indefinitely postponed on House floor.

Mississippi SB 2945 Specifies public defender is authorized to assign the duties of all employees of the office without regard to the source of funding for those employees. Approved by full Senate, died in House Judiciary B committee.

Texas SB 1682 Authorizes the creation of a managed assigned counsel program by a locality with written approval of a judge of the juvenile court of a county or county court, statutory county court, or district court trying criminal cases. Approved by full Senate and House Criminal Jurisprudence committee. Died on House floor.

Died in committee

Arkansas HB 2146 Defines crime of “illegal disbursement of funds by a judge”. Makes illegal instances where judge makes payments for services rendered to a public defender, assistant public defender, prosecuting attorney, or deputy prosecuting attorney resulting from the exercise of that person’s official duties.

Arkansas SB 941 Provides public defenders must provide itemized bill with a detailed explanation of services rendered, time spent, and expenses incurred. Renames converts certificates of indigency into affidavits to be created by public defender commission. Increases from $100 to $250 maximum user fee payable to commission.

Arkansas SB 974 Designates public defender commission a criminal justice agency for purposes of access to the Arkansas Crime Information Center.

Mississippi HB 181 Sets hourly payment for indigent defense counsel as 80% of the hourly rate allowed in the Mississippi’s federal courts. Provides judge presiding in case may adjust the total requested payment to counsel in a case if the court finds that the number of hours claimed by counsel in that case is not reasonable.

Mississippi HB 153 Creates District Public Defender Pilot project.

Mississippi HB 978 Provides public defender salaries are to be same as county prosecutors.

Mississippi SB 2971 Authorizes loan forgiveness programs for education loans to encourage law students and other attorneys to choose careers in the area of public interest, including specifically public defenders and civil legal aid attorneys.

Texas HB 1475 Provides for longevity pay for assistant public defenders.

Texas HB 1392 Creates special $95 fee for sale of property at a foreclosure sale to pay for civil legal services to the indigent.

Texas HB 2174 / SB 726 Establishes judicial access and improvement account to provide funding for basic civil legal services, indigent defense, and judicial technical support through certain county service fees and court costs imposed to fund the account. (See also Special Session HB 34 / SB 23)

Texas HB 1918 / SB 1028 Requires a district court judge to appoint one attorney, rather than two, when a capital felony case is filed. Provides in cases where prosecutors do not seek the death penalty a second attorney will not be required to be appointed.

State-by-State 2011 Legislative Year in Review: Mississippi

August 23rd, 2011

New laws, plus two resolutions, affecting the courts enacted or adopted by the Mississippi legislature in 2011 include the following:

HB 193 Provides governing authorities of any municipality or board of supervisors for a county in the state may donate funds from county treasury to any chapter of Court Appointed Special Advocates, up to a specified maximum.

HB 224 Provides court having jurisdiction over a person for a matter before the court shall have the final determination about whether the person may participate in drug court.

HB 490 Exempts from new competency examination all sitting justice court judges.

HB 506 Allows all prosecutors, public defenders, and others holding a firearms license and having taking a specified court to carry a firearm into any courthouse except in courtrooms during a judicial proceeding.

HB 773 Establishes procedure where a single candidate has qualified for election to judicial office but dies, resigns, or is otherwise disqualified prior to the general election.

HB 852 Permits U.S. District Judge or Magistrate Judge for Northern or Southern District of Mississippi to admit law students to limited practice in any state or federal court in Mississippi.

HB 881 Allows all prosecutors, public defenders, and others holding a firearms license and having taking a specified court to carry a firearm into any courthouse except in courtrooms during a judicial proceeding. (Other provisions in bill make it similar but not identical to HB 506).

SB 2554 Revises existing law requiring searchable website for all state expenditures. Redefines “agency” as “all elective offices in the executive, legislative and judicial branches of state government” but specifically not “counties or municipalities.”

HR 81 Commends Mississippi Drug Court Program for saving lives and saving money for Mississippi taxpayers.

HR 86 Recognizes and commends drug court graduates upon successful completion of the program.

2011 Southern bail/pretrial release legislation

August 17th, 2011

Law

Alabama HB 56 Requires determination if defendant is unlawfully present in U.S. prior to bail determination and, if determined not lawfully present, denial of bail. (see also SB 256).

Kentucky HB 463 / SB 161 Establishes pretrial release and considerations for persons based on risk of flight and danger before trial and require credit toward bail based on time spent in jail before trial. Requires the Supreme Court to create guidelines for judges to use when considering pretrial release and monitored conditional release. Directs the courts to develop guidelines for pretrial release decision making, and directs judges to use these guidelines in making those decisions. Requires those on pretrial release to use GPS monitoring. Provides a maximum bail is not to exceed the amount of fine and court costs for specified crimes. Requires Department of Corrections to provide training on evidence-based practices to employees of pretrial services.

Louisiana HB 216 Provides failure to to make probable cause determination within 48 hours of arrest, resulting in release, does not preclude the defendant’s rearrest and resetting of bond for the same offense or offenses upon the issuance of an arrest warrant based upon a finding of probable cause by a magistrate.

Mississippi SB 2239 Clarifies that domestic violence bail bond fee is to be refunded to defendant who is not finally convicted.

Oklahoma HB 1347 Creates Wildlife Bail Procedure Act, setting procedures for persons arrested for violation of any section of the Oklahoma Wildlife Conservation Code.

Tennessee HB 703 / SB 861 Directs that a defendant released on a pre-trial bond continue on release pending the trial under the same terms and conditions unless the court determines other terms and conditions or termination of the bond is necessary. Authorizes a court to revoke a defendant’s bond and order defendant held without bail pending trial if the defendant violates a release condition; is charged with an offense committed during release; or engages in conduct that obstructs the orderly and expeditious progress of the trial or other proceedings.

Tennessee HB 718 / SB 1269 Provides, in certain DUI-related cases,defendant may not be released with another bail “until the judge or judicial commissioner sets conditions on the bond to attempt to eliminate the danger posed by the defendant” instead of “unless the court first determines the defendant is no longer a danger to the community.”

Tennessee HB 962 / SB 802 Directs issuance of a capias warrant for a criminal defendant who forfeits bond. If circumstances require, authorizes use of a duplicate copy of the capias until a certified copy of the capias can be obtained from the clerk’s office.

Texas HB 1070 / SB 972 Allows a county jailer to take a defendant’s bail bond.

Texas HB 1658 Specifies that a defendant may be refunded a bail bond on order of the court and only after the defendant complies with the conditions of the bond.

Texas HB 1822 Specifically authorizes a partial release of security when the amount of security remaining would meet certain requirements.

Texas HB 1823 Harmonizes provisions related to bail bond business in Code of Criminal Procedure with related provisions under the Occupations Code.

Texas HB 3077 / SB 877 Requires a sheriff, prosecuting attorney, or clerk of the court to verify an affidavit from a surety stating the accused is in custody of another governmental entity before discharging the surety’s liability on a bail bond. Requires a sheriff to place a detainer on the accused and notify both appropriate officials in the jurisdiction in which the accused is incarcerated and the court or magistrate for which prosecution is pending. Requires magistrate then direct the court to issue a capias for the arrest of the accused if deemed necessary.

Introduced with committee and/or floor approval

Tennessee HB 1312 / SB 1862 Removes the requirement that a court determine whether a defendant is a danger to the community prior to releasing the defendant on bail for being charged with vehicular assault, vehicular homicide or driving under the influence.

Tennessee HB 1380 / SB 780 Specifies that when determining the amount of bail, if it is determined that the defendant is unlawfully present in the United States, then there would be a presumption that the defendant is a flight risk.

Texas HB 770 Enhances the penalty for bail jumping and failure to appear as a condition of being released from custody from a Class A misdemeanor to a felony of the first degree if the offense for which the actor’s appearance was required is an offense of murder or capital murder.

Texas HB 875 Requires the sheriff or other officer to notify the judge or magistrate authorized to grant or deny the defendant’s release on bail if the sheriff or officer determines that the defendant was not lawfully admitted to the United States or, although lawfully admitted, the defendant’s lawful status has expired. Requires the Commission on Jail Standards to prepare and issue guidelines and procedures to ensure compliance with these provisions. Establishes a rebuttable presumption at any proceeding before the judge or magistrate concerning the defendant’s release on bail that the defendant presents a risk of flight from prosecution if a sheriff or other officer notifies a judge or magistrate that a defendant was not lawfully admitted to the United States or that, although lawfully admitted, the defendant’s lawful status has expired.

Texas HB 1784 Allows a court to refund any cash funds to a defendant after the defendant complies with the bond conditions. Allows a defendant, as part of a plea bargain or deferred prosecution agreement, to request funds to be withheld for outstanding fines, court costs, or amounts of restitution, but not to repay attorney’s fees.

Texas HJR 86 (Constitutional Amendment) Denies bail to certain persons who are unlawfully present in the United States and are taken into custody for committing a felony.

Texas HJR 98 (Constitutional Amendment) Denies bail to certain persons charged with a violent or sexual offense after having been previously convicted of a violent or sexual offense.

Texas SB 878 Prohibits a court or a magistrate from authorizing a defendant to deposit cash less than the full amount of bail set by the court or magistrate, nor require money or other security as a condition of bond for release.

Introduced with committee rejection

Alabama HB 481 / SB 276 Requires as condition for bail after an arrest for a second or subsequent DUI violation that a defendant have an ignition interlock device installed.

Alabama SB 291 Requires as condition for bail after an arrest for DUI violation that a defendant have an ignition interlock device installed.

Tennessee HB 1501 / SB 1987 Makes a person who is charged with sexual exploitation of a minor ineligible for suspension of prosecution and pretrial diversion.

Texas HB 1686 Require a judge or magistrate in whose court a criminal action is pending to discharge a surety’s liability on a bail bond under the following conditions: the surety files with the judge or magistrate an affidavit stating that more than five years have elapsed since the date on which the surety posted the bond, that the surety no longer wishes to be a surety on the bond, and that the surety will give the prosecuting attorney notice of the affidavit; and the surety gives such notice of the affidavit to the prosecuting attorney. Requires a judge or magistrate who discharges a surety’s liability in that manner, if an indictment or information remains pending against the defendant, to issue a capias for the defendant.

Introduced with other or no activity

Alabama HB 481 Requires as condition for bail after an arrest for a second or subsequent DUI violation that a defendant have an ignition interlock device installed.

Arkansas HB 1245 Modifies existing law regarding issuance of warrants for failure to appear for those held on bond. Provides a judgment entered when the defendant has been surrendered, apprehended, or arrested within one hundred twenty (120) days of receipt of written notification to the surety of the defendant’s failure to appear is void.

Arkansas HB 1246 Permits financing of bail bonds.

Arkansas HB 2169 “Affirmatively clarifies” financing of bail bonds is prohibited.

Mississippi HB 54 Establishes rebuttable presumption defendant presents a risk of flight if not lawfully admitted to the United States.

Mississippi HB 1266 Imposes a 1% increase on fee charged for bail bonds to be deposited in the State Treasury for Department of Mental Health.

Mississippi HCR 14 Prohibits issuance of bail for sex offenses.

Mississippi SB 2474 Clarifies procedures by which ail is set by municipal court. Provides bail set is payable to municipality.

Mississippi SB 2505 In cases of domestic violence, requires Protective Order Registry be checked before granting bail on another charge.

Oklahoma SB 705 Changes numerous laws with respect to personal recognizance, forfeiture of bail, release on personal recognizance, posting bail, and suspension of driving privilege. Modifies certain arraignment requirements. Removes requirement for release on personal recognizance under specified circumstances.

Tennessee HB 1578 / SB 770 Specifies that when determining the amount of bail, if it is determined that the defendant is unlawfully present in the United States, then there would be a presumption that the defendant is a flight risk.

Texas HB 168 Requires that a bail bond state an expiration date of not later than the third anniversary of the date the principal signed the bond.

Texas HB 532 Establishes a rebuttable presumption at any proceeding before the judge or magistrate concerning the defendant’s release on bail that the defendant presents a risk of flight from prosecution if a sheriff or other officer notifies a judge or magistrate that a defendant was not lawfully admitted to the United States or that, although lawfully admitted, the defendant’s lawful status has expired.

Texas HB 2467 Authorizes a surety to relieve the surety of the surety’s undertaking by delivering an affidavit to the prosecuting attorney and the county court clerk stating that the accused is incarcerated, unless the accused is not a United States citizen and is unlawfully present in the United States.

Texas SB 881 Allows a defendant and a defendant’s sureties to be exonerated from liability upon forfeiture if before the final judgment, there was a death of the principal or the principal was deported from the United States.

Texas SB 909 Relating to the discharge of a surety’s liability on a bail bond in a criminal case.

Bans on court use of sharia/international law: ABA House of Delegates opposes “blanket prohibitions”, state legislatures out of session

August 8th, 2011

This post has been updated. Click here.

Earlier today, the American Bar Association House of Delegates approved Resolution 113A:

RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association opposes federal or state laws imposing blanket prohibitions on consideration or use by courts or arbitral tribunals of foreign or international law.

FURTHER RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association opposes federal or state laws imposing blanket prohibitions on consideration or use by courts or arbitral tribunals of the entire body of law or doctrine of a particular religion.

Clearly geared towards efforts to ban court use of sharia/international law, the resolution comes at a time when the state legislatures are out of session and silent. Since the July update, no legislative activity has occurred, although the Michigan bill remains technically pending (the legislature sits year-round).

Full roster of 49 bills introduced in 2011 in 22 states and their statuses after the jump.

» Read more: Bans on court use of sharia/international law: ABA House of Delegates opposes “blanket prohibitions”, state legislatures out of session

Bans on court use of sharia/international law: Michigan becomes 22nd state to consider, Texas House tries again to get Senate to adopt

July 5th, 2011

This post has been updated. Click here.

With Alabama, Iowa, and North Carolina all set to adjourn in June, it looked as if there would not be any additional sharia/international law bans introduced or debated in 2011. However, in mid-June Michigan introduced a bill (HB 4769) co-sponsored by 42 of 63 Michigan House Republicans that copied much of the language from the versions introduced in Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Missouri, South Dakota, and West Virginia, in particular the use of the term “informal tribunals” or “informal administrative body” in all of these versions, something that does not appear in the others.

Meanwhile, Texas in its special session reintroduced one of theirs from the regular session. I went into the details of the legislative machinations in May in Texas in my last update. In sum, the ban was limited to family law/Family Code cases by a House committee (HB 911), was added onto the “losers pays” tort reform bill at the last minute on the House floor (Amendment #6 to HB 274), and stripped out by a Senate committee.

June proved to be a repeat of May’s efforts. The original HB 79A, a bill for the implementation of the judiciary budget, did not include the ban. Instead, it was again floor amended in (Amendment #12), over the objections of a least one member of the House who attempted to have the amendment ruled not germane to the bill. The amendment was ruled germane and adopted on a 105-29-2 vote. Once again, a Senate committee (this time the Jurisprudence Committee) stripped the provision out and the bill was sent to the governor without the ban on June 29.

Full roster of 49 bills introduced in 2011 in 22 states and their statuses after the jump.

» Read more: Bans on court use of sharia/international law: Michigan becomes 22nd state to consider, Texas House tries again to get Senate to adopt

Bans on court use of sharia/international law: 38 of 47 bills died or rejected this session; only 1 enacted into law

June 3rd, 2011

This post has been updated. Click here.

With most state legislatures going out of session, May proved to relatively inactive for bills seeking to ban court use of sharia/international law. In the May update (located here) there were 44 bills in 21 states. In June, the number of bills climbed to 47 in 21 states. As of today, the status of the 47 breaks down as follows:

38 died due to adjournment or had been rejected by their respective legislatures.

1 was signed into law (Arizona’s HB 2064 on April 12).

8 remain at least theoretically active: 4 in Alabama; 3 in Iowa; 1 in North Carolina.

Texas was the focus of much of the May activity. On May 9, the text of the House Committee on Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence ban (HB 911) approved in April was floor-amended (Amendment #6) into the so-called “loser pays” tort reform bill (HB 274). This version, as amended in committee, was much more limited than others and specified it applied in matters “arising under the Family Code” only and then only if “the application of that [foreign] law would violate a right guaranteed by the United States Constitution or the constitution or a statute of this state.” Amendment 6 was approved by a 112-31 vote in the House, but was removed by the Senate State Affairs committee and failed to be enacted when the final version of HB 274 was signed into law May 30.

Meanwhile, on (May 10) the House Select Committee on State Sovereignty advanced a broader version (HB 1240) of a sharia/international law ban

“foreign or international law or doctrine” means a law, rule, legal code, or principle of a jurisdiction outside the legal traditions of the states and territories of the United States, including international laws, that do not have a binding effect on this state or the United States…A court, arbitrator, or administrative adjudicator may not base a ruling or decision on: (1) a foreign or international law or doctrine; or (2) a prior ruling or decision that was based on a foreign or international law or doctrine.

HB 1240 proceeded to the House Calendars committee, where it died when the legislature adjourned.

Full roster of bills introduced in 2011 and their status after the jump.

» Read more: Bans on court use of sharia/international law: 38 of 47 bills died or rejected this session; only 1 enacted into law

Alabama Senate joins other states in favoring federal law to intercept payments for court-owed fees/fines

May 13th, 2011

I noted in February 2010 (Issue 4:8) that several state legislatures were encouraging Congress to adopt a bill to allow for court debt to be collected through the U.S. Treasury’s Offset Program (TOP) which is used to collect delinquent debts owed to federal agencies and states (including past-due child support). Last week, Alabama’s SJR 122 was introduced directly onto the floor and adopted by voice vote. While the text is not yet available on the legislature’s website, it is available thanks to the legislative tracking services provided by our friends at LexisNexis.

WHEREAS, the courts of this state order the payment of restitution to victims of crime as well as the payment of court fines and fees at the conclusion of criminal matters; and

WHEREAS, victims of crime are due these monies to help compensate them for the wrong which has been visited upon them by the perpetrator, and the state is due these monies to offset the costs of ensuring “[t]hat all courts shall be open” as required by the Constitution of Alabama of 1901; and

WHEREAS, unpaid restitutions and court fines and fees have been and continue to be a problem in this state, with currently over $ 551 million being due the State of Alabama in unpaid court-imposed fines and fees; and

WHEREAS, the Legislature by Act 2004-505, now codified as Section 40-18-100, et seq., Code of Alabama 1975, enabled the Alabama Department of Revenue to collect unpaid court fines and fees by use of a setoff of the state income tax refund of a debtor; and

WHEREAS, since the enactment of Act 2004-505, over $ 13.3 million have been collected in unpaid court costs and fines by the Alabama Department of Revenue; and

WHEREAS, the Crime Victim Restitution and Court Fee Intercept Act will enable the United States Treasury to offset restitution and other state judicial debts against an individual’s federal income tax refund in a similar manner as the Alabama Department of Revenue is permitted to do so pursuant to Act 2004-505; and

WHEREAS, the enactment of this legislation will enable victims of crime to receive the restitution due them as well as for states to collect unpaid court fines and fees; now therefore,

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF ALABAMA, BOTH HOUSES THEREOF CONCURRING, That we hereby urge the United States Congress to approve H.R. 1416 and S. 755, the Crime Victim Restitution and Court Fee Intercept Act, with all due haste.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That a copy of this resolution will be provided to each member of Alabama’s Congressional Delegation.

Alabama is now the seventh state to consider supporting such a federal intercept program.

2011

Filed in May 2010 and still technically pending, New Jersey’s SCR 100 uses much the same language as Delaware’s HJR 14 of 2010 (see below).

2010

March: Mississippi’s SCR 671 noted that “the legislation has received support from a broad-based coalition of public interest groups such as the National Association for Court Management…” Due to its late filing late in the session, however, it failed to be adopted.

Delaware’s HJR 9 and HJR 14 claimed “the increased collection of court-ordered restitution, fines, fees and costs will benefit victims of crime, the State of Delaware, Delaware’s Counties and other municipalities, along with programs such as the Victim’s Compensation Fund and court security, all of which are particularly important during these extraordinarily challenging economic times…” HJR 14 which was eventually adopted unanimously by both chambers of the Delaware legislature and signed by the governor.

2009

February: New Mexico’s legislature considered HJM 73 in favor of the intercept legislation, finding “more than nine thousand individuals have outstanding fines and fees ordered by a court in New Mexico, which fines and fees total just under two million five hundred twenty-one thousand dollars ($2,521,000).” Moreover, New Mexico’s own state-level version, a tax refund intercept program, had already collected nearly $150,000 in unpaid fees and fines (as of February 2009). The resolution estimated that participation in the federal program would “conservatively” result in $300,000 in collections for the judicial branch of the state. HJM 73 was later approved unanimously by the legislature.

Arkansas HCR 1010 was introduced, supporting the bill, claiming the collection system would “contribute positively to the public trust and confidence in the judicial system. Like its New Mexico counterpart, HCR 1010 was approved unanimously by the state legislature.

April: Oregon’s SJM 12 was also unanimously approved by that state’s legislature, using much the same language as Arkansas HCR 1010 and also meets with unanimous legislative approval.

Bans on court use of sharia/international law: Law in Arizona, bills advance in Missouri and Texas, failing in most states

May 3rd, 2011

This post has been updated. Click here.

In the April update (located here) there were 44 bills in 21 states seek to ban court use of sharia/international law. There have been no new bills, but almost all existing ones have either died or failed to advance in the last several weeks. As of today, the status of the 44 break down as follows:

20 died due to adjournment or had been rejected by their respective legislatures.

11  failed to make it out of committee in their originating house before the legislature’s internal deadline.

1 failed to make it out of committee in the second house before the legislature’s internal deadline (Oklahoma HB 1552).

1 was signed into law (Arizona’s HB 2064 on April 12).

11 remain at least theoretically active.

Of the active, only three moved in the last month.

  • Texas: One of the House bills was approved in committee, but with a massive shift in wording. HB 911 was originally a broad-based ban on the use of foreign law “if the application of that law would violate a right guaranteed by the United States Constitution or the constitution of this state.” As amended, however, the ban applies only “on a matter arising under the Family Code.” As amended, the bill passed the House Committee on Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence on April 18.
  • Missouri: The House approved one of its versions (HB 708). The Senate committee scrapped the House bill in favor of its own (SB 308).

Both use the same definition of “foreign law”

As used in this section, “foreign law, legal code, or system” means any law, legal code, or system of a jurisdiction outside of any state or territory of the United States, including but not limited to international organizations and tribunals, and applied by that jurisdiction’s courts, administrative bodies, or other formal or informal tribunals.

Both use nearly identical wording for what is banned (differences in bold).

House: Any court, arbitration, tribunal, or administrative agency ruling or decision violates the public policy of this state and shall be void and unenforceable if such court, arbitration, tribunal, or administrative agency bases its rulings or decisions in the matter at issue in whole or in part on any law, legal code, or system that would not grant the parties affected by the ruling or decision the same fundamental liberties, rights, and privileges granted under the constitutions of this state and the United States.

Senate: Any court, arbitration, tribunal, or administrative agency ruling or decision shall violate the public policy of this state and be void and unenforceable if the court, arbitration, tribunal, or administrative agency bases its rulings or decisions in the matter at issue in whole or in part on any foreign law, legal code, or system that would not grant the parties affected by the ruling or decision the same fundamental liberties, rights, and privileges granted under the United States and Missouri constitutions.

The big difference appears to be in the provisions related to contracts. The Senate version waives the ban on the use of “foreign law” where the clause is “capable of segregation” from the rest of the contract.

Minor differences include a provision in the House version that declares “The general assembly fully recognizes the right to contract freely under the laws of this state, and also recognizes that this right may be reasonably and rationally circumscribed in accordance with the state’s interest to protect and promote rights and privileges granted under the constitutions of this state and the United States.” Moreover, the House version would amend Missouri Revised Statutes Chapter 1 (Laws in Force and Construction of Statutes) while the Senate version adds to Chapter 506 (Commencement of Actions and General Provisions).

Full roster of bills introduced in 2011 and their status after the jump.

» Read more: Bans on court use of sharia/international law: Law in Arizona, bills advance in Missouri and Texas, failing in most states

Bans on court use of sharia/international law advance in Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma

April 11th, 2011

Welcome New York Times readers!

This post has been updated. Click here.

In the March update (located here) there were 42 bills introduced in 2011 in 20 states seeking to ban court use of sharia/international law. That number is now up to 44 bills in 21 states.

  • Arizona’s “new” bill was really a strike-all amendment to a completely unrelated bill HB 2064. The resulting bill was approved April 7 and is currently sitting on Governor Jan Brewer’s desk.
  • North Carolina HB 640 was introduced April 5 and is currently pending in the House Committee on Judiciary, Subcommittee C.

In addition to Arizona, bills in 6 other states advanced out of their committees or chambers, including Alabama SB 61 and SB 62, Alaska HB 88,  Florida SB 1294, Kansas HB 2087, Missouri HB 708, and Oklahoma HB 1552. Additionally, hearings were conducted in Texas and Missouri. All 2011 activity is in bold below the fold.

» Read more: Bans on court use of sharia/international law advance in Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma

Mid-session update: 42 bills in 20 states seek to ban court use of sharia/international law (with list and links)

March 15th, 2011

Welcome ABA Journal readers! This post has been updated, here.

We are about half way through the 2011 state legislative season and so far there have been 42 bills in 2011 to ban or otherwise restrict court references or use to sharia/international law.

Prior 2011 posts on the subject can be found here, here, and here.

Below is an update on the current (as of 3/14/11) status of such efforts. Hearings coming up this week include Alaska HB 88, Missouri HB 708, Missouri SB 308, and Nebraska LB 647.

Interestingly, some of the most recently filed bills (Iowa HB 489 filed March 2;  Maine HB 811 filed March 15; West Virginia HB 3220 filed February 21) now provide that foreign law cannot be the “primary factor which a court…shall consider”.

» Read more: Mid-session update: 42 bills in 20 states seek to ban court use of sharia/international law (with list and links)