CACR36 (2006) Detail

Relating to the rulemaking authority of the supreme court. Providing that the supreme court may adopt rules, that the general court may regulate these matters by statute, and that in the event of a conflict between a statute and a rule, the statute, if otherwise valid, shall prevail over the rule.


CACR 36 - AS INTRODUCED

2006 SESSION

06-2198

06/04

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 36

RELATING TO: the rulemaking authority of the supreme court.

PROVIDING THAT: the supreme court may adopt rules, that the general court may regulate these matters by statute, and that in the event of a conflict between a statute and a rule, the statute, if otherwise valid, shall prevail over the rule.

SPONSORS: Rep. J. Wheeler, Hills 6

COMMITTEE: Judiciary

ANALYSIS

This constitutional amendment concurrent resolution provides that the supreme court may adopt rules of general application and that the general court may also regulate these matters by statutes of general application, provided that the general court may not abridge the judiciary’s necessary adjudicatory functions. The resolution also provides that in the event of a conflict between a statute and a rule, the statute shall prevail over the rule.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.

Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.]

Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.

06-2198

06/04

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Six

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION PROPOSING CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT

RELATING TO: the rulemaking authority of the supreme court.

PROVIDING THAT: the supreme court may adopt rules, that the general court may regulate these matters by statute, and that in the event of a conflict between a statute and a rule, the statute, if otherwise valid, shall prevail over the rule.

Be it Resolved by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring, that the

Constitution of New Hampshire be amended as follows:

I. That part II, article 73-a of the constitution be repealed and reenacted in order to clarify that both the judiciary and the legislature have the authority to regulate court practices and procedures and to resolve potential conflicts that may arise, so that it reads as follows:

[Art.] 73-a. [Court Practices and Procedures.] The chief justice of the supreme court shall be the administrative head of all the courts in the state. The chief justice shall have the power, with the concurrence of a majority of the other supreme court justices, to make rules of general application regulating court administration and the practice, procedure, and admissibility of evidence, in all courts in the state. The legislature shall have a concurrent power to regulate the same matters by statutes of general application, except that such legislative enactments may not abridge the judiciary’s necessary adjudicatory functions. In the event of a conflict between a rule promulgated by the judiciary and a statute enacted by the legislature, the statute shall prevail over the rule.

II. That the above amendment proposed to the constitution be submitted to the qualified voters of the state at the state general election to be held in November, 2006.

III. That the selectmen of all towns, cities, wards and places in the state are directed to insert in their warrants for the said 2006 election an article to the following effect: To decide whether the amendments of the constitution proposed by the 2006 session of the general court shall be approved.

IV. That the wording of the question put to the qualified voters shall be:

“Are you in favor of repealing and reenacting part II, article 73-a of the constitution in order to clarify that both the judiciary and legislature have the authority to regulate court practices and procedures and to resolve potential conflicts that may arise so that it reads as follows:

[Art.] 73-a. [Court Practices and Procedures.] The chief justice of the supreme court shall be the administrative head of all the courts in the state. The chief justice shall have the power, with the concurrence of a majority of the other supreme court justices, to make rules of general application regulating court administration and the practice, procedure, and admissibility of evidence, in all courts in the state. The legislature shall have a concurrent power to regulate the same matters by statutes of general application, except that such legislative enactments may not abridge the judiciary’s necessary adjudicatory functions. In the event of a conflict between a rule promulgated by the judiciary and a statute enacted by the legislature, the statute shall prevail over the rule.”

V. That the secretary of state shall print the question to be submitted on a separate ballot or on the same ballot with other constitutional questions. The ballot containing the question shall include 2 squares next to the question allowing the voter to vote “Yes” or “No.” If no cross is made in either of the squares, the ballot shall not be counted on the question. The outside of the ballot shall be the same as the regular official ballot except that the words “Questions Relating to Constitutional Amendments proposed by the 2006 General Court” shall be printed in bold type at the top of the ballot.

VI. That if the proposed amendment is approved by 2/3 of those voting on the amendment, it becomes effective when the governor proclaims its adoption.

Links

CACR36 at GenCourtMobile

Action Dates

Date Body Type

Bill Text Revisions

CACR36 Revision: 9367 Date: Jan. 21, 2010, midnight

Docket