The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News, your source for engaging and informative Texas news. Our publication focuses on delivering accurate and impactful stories that matter to you, with a primary emphasis on South Texas, including Hays, Bexar, Nueces, Webb, Cameron, and Hidalgo counties. Stay informed about pressing issues and gain a deeper understanding of your government. With a commitment to transparency and accountability, trust us to provide reliable information that holds those in power accountable.
The Texas Attorney General’s Office has filed a lawsuit against the City of San Marcos over a marijuana law. The lawsuit seeks to declare the city’s ordinance and police department directive void and is also requesting temporary and permanent injunctions. The city’s law conflicts with state law, and the state is seeking relief through legal action.
San Marcos Gets Sued After Predecessor DA Opinion Request on Marijuana Law Gets Canceled
The prior Hays County District Attorney’s requested the Texas Attorney General’s Office to make a legal opinion on the City of San Marcos law which prohibits enforcement of marijuana laws in the city limits. We published about the newly elected Hays County District Attorney cancelling the opinion request of his predecessor.
Now, it seems the opinion was still issued and it indicates the City of San Marcos has a law which is considered illegal. This is the argument the Texas Attorney General’s Office is making. However, the opinion in this case is in a form of a lawsuit.
Analysis of the Texas Attorney General Lawsuit on the City of San Marcos
The Texas Attorney General’s Office has filed a lawsuit against the City of San Marcos, arguing that the city’s ordinance designed to eliminate marijuana enforcement is in violation of state law and the Texas Constitution. According to the Attorney General, the ordinance and any corresponding San Marcos Police Department directive constitute a policy that does not fully enforce laws relating to drugs, including the possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia as outlined in Chapter 481 of the Health and Safety Code.
This, the Attorney General argues, is preempted by section 370.003 of the Texas Local Government Code, which prohibits municipalities and police departments from adopting such policies. Additionally, the Attorney General contends that the ordinance is unconstitutional as it goes against the state constitution’s provision that no ordinance shall contain any provision inconsistent with the state constitution or the general laws enacted by the Legislature.
Based on the information provided, it appears that the State of Texas has filed an Original Petition and Application for Temporary and Permanent Injunction. In this legal action, the State is seeking the following from the Court:
- Declaration of the ordinance and any corresponding San Marcos Police Department general order or directive as ultra vires and void.
- Ordering the Defendants to:
- Repeal the Ordinance
- Cancel any corresponding San Marcos Police Department general order or directive
- Fully enforce the drug laws in chapter 481
- Not discipline any employee of the City of San Marcos for enforcing the drug laws in Chapter 481
- Modify city policies and internal operating procedures to the extent that they have been updated in response to the ordinance.
The Texas Attorney General’s Office Summarizes the Facts Leading to the City of San Marcos Ordinance
The lawsuit filed by the Texas Attorney General’s Office against the City of San Marcos stems from the citizens’ successful passage of Proposition A on November 8, 2022. This proposition introduced an ordinance to regulate the enforcement of marijuana laws by the San Marcos Police Department, specifically those governed by Chapter 481 of the Texas Health and Safety Code. Despite the acknowledgment by the San Marcos Police Department that it lacks the authority to enforce the ordinance due to a conflict with state law, the ordinance remains in effect as City of San Marcos Code of Ordinances Chapter 54 – Miscellaneous Offenses, Article 4 – Marijuana Enforcement.
Chief Stan Standridge issued a memorandum to police department personnel outlining the department’s policy complying with the ordinance, and confirmed to Community Impact that the department is in full compliance with the ordinance, contrary to the acknowledgment of the conflict with state law. This discrepancy between the acknowledgment of the conflict and the department’s purported compliance forms the basis of the legal action taken by the Texas Attorney General’s Office.
The Texas Attorney General’s Office Provides a Legal Analysis on the City of San Marco’s Ordinance
The Texas Attorney General’s legal analysis argues that despite San Marcos being a home-rule municipality with the power of self-government, any ordinance passed under its charter must not contain provisions inconsistent with the state constitution or general laws enacted by the Legislature. The analysis cites the Texas Local Government Code, which prohibits municipalities and police departments from adopting a policy that does not fully enforce laws relating to drugs, including chapters 481 and 483 of the Health and Safety Code and federal law.
The analysis breaks down specific sections of the San Marcos ordinance, highlighting how each provision violates the state law by not fully enforcing Chapter 481 of the Health and Safety Code. This includes prohibitions on issuing citations or making arrests for possession of marijuana, possession of drug residue or drug paraphernalia, conducting THC testing, and holding meetings to discuss ordinance implementation. Additionally, the analysis points out that the ordinance threatens San Marcos police officers with discipline for not enforcing Chapter 481, further violating state law.
Furthermore, the Texas Attorney General’s Office asserts that the San Marcos ordinance is unenforceable because it is unmistakably at odds with state law, making it unconstitutional and ultra vires. The legal analysis concludes with the assertion that the Defendants lack legal authority to adopt the ordinance and corresponding police department general order or directive.
The Texas Attorney General’s Office Seeks Relief from the City of San Marcos Ordinance
The State of Texas has brought forth a request for relief in the lawsuit against the City of San Marcos. The relief sought encompasses various forms of legal action, including the following:
Declaratory Judgment Request
The State of Texas seeks a declaratory judgment from the Court, declaring the Ordinance and any corresponding police department general order or directive as ultra vires and void.
Application for Temporary Injunction
The State asserts its entitlement to a temporary injunction. To support this claim, it must establish (1) a cause of action against the defendant; (2) a probable right to the relief sought; and (3) a probable, imminent, and irreparable injury in the interim.
The State has a cause of action against Defendants for ultra vires acts and a probable right of recovery. The City of San Marcos has no authority to pass the Ordinance, and the San Marcos Police Department has no authority to issue a corresponding general order or directive.
The State’s showing of likely success on the merits satisfies the irreparable-injury requirement for a temporary injunction. Therefore, the State is entitled to a temporary injunction, enjoining Defendants from enforcing the Ordinance and any corresponding San Marcos Police Department general order or directive, and ordering Defendants to take specific actions as delineated in the legal request.
Application for Permanent Injunction
The State of Texas also requests a trial on the merits, where it will seek a permanent injunction enjoining Defendants from enforcing the Ordinance and any corresponding San Marcos Police Department general order or directive. The permanent injunction is aimed at compelling the Defendants to take specific actions, including the repeal of the Ordinance and the full enforcement of the drug laws in Chapter 481. Additionally, it seeks to prevent the discipline of any employee of the City of San Marcos for enforcing the drug laws in Chapter 481, and to modify city policies and internal operating procedures as necessary.
These requests form the basis of the relief sought by the Texas Attorney General’s Office in the ongoing legal action against the City of San Marcos.
Summary of Lawsuit: Texas Attorney General vs. City of San Marcos
The Texas Attorney General’s Office has filed a lawsuit against the City of San Marcos, challenging the city’s ordinance that aims to eliminate marijuana law enforcement. This legal action stems from a conflicting ordinance passed by the citizens and the San Marcos Police Department’s purported compliance with it, despite acknowledging its conflict with state law. The Attorney General argues that the ordinance violates state law and the Texas Constitution.
The lawsuit seeks various forms of legal relief, including a declaratory judgment declaring the ordinance and related police department directive as ultra vires and void, as well as applications for temporary and permanent injunctions. The State aims to compel the City of San Marcos to repeal the ordinance and enforce drug laws fully, while preventing the discipline of any employee for enforcing the drug laws and modifying city policies as necessary.
The legal analysis provided by the Texas Attorney General’s Office breaks down specific provisions of the ordinance that are deemed to violate state law and highlights the ordinance’s unenforceability due to its conflict with state law, making it unconstitutional and ultra vires. This comprehensive summary encapsulates the ongoing legal dispute between the State of Texas and the City of San Marcos regarding marijuana law enforcement within the city limits.
Disclaimer
This publishing is for educational and informational purposes only. The information presented in this publication is based on the publicized legal dispute between the Texas Attorney General’s Office and the City of San Marcos regarding the enforcement of marijuana laws within the city limits. The content aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the ongoing lawsuit and the legal arguments put forth by the involved parties.
However, it is essential to note that the perspectives and assertions outlined in this analysis represent the positions of the Texas Attorney General’s Office and may not encompass the complete scope of legal considerations or the City of San Marcos’ stance. Readers are encouraged to seek legal advice or consult official sources for a well-rounded understanding of the matter. This publication does not constitute legal advice and should not be interpreted as such. The details and developments of the legal dispute may have evolved since the time of publication. Therefore, readers are advised to verify the current status of the case and any subsequent resolutions.
A Couple of Our Other Reads
You may be interested in our publishing on two State Board of Pharmacy officers resigning to avoid termination.
Or you may find our publishing about a TABC officer resigning to avoid termination, of interest.
Follow Us on Social Media
If you are interested in staying updated on matters about your government in Texas and other important stories, trust The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News to provide reliable information that matters to you. You can follow us on social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, X, Reddit, YouTube, Tumblr, and LinkedIn to stay connected and informed.
FACEBOOK: TheHawksEyeNews
INSTAGRAM: Hawk_s_Eye_C_and_N
X: TheHawksEyeNews
REDDIT: TheHawksEyeCN
YOUTUBE: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News
TUMBLR: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News
LINKEDIN: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News