ADVISORY OPINION TO THE GOVERNOR

Fla. | 1957-06-06
95 So. 2d 603 Florida Supreme Court (1957) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

The Florida Supreme Court advised Governor LeRoy Collins that bills presented to him during the last five days of an extended legislative session (ending June 8, 1957) would be subject to the twenty-day post-adjournment veto period under Article III, Section 28 of the Florida Constitution, not the five-day period applicable during the regular session. The court held that the legislature's power to extend its regular session expired after the sixtieth day and could not be further extended.


Holding

The Governor will have twenty days after June 8 to act upon bills presented within the last five days of the extended session. The current extension cannot be further extended because the legislature's constitutional authority to extend the regular session expires at the end of the sixtieth day, and the extension must be accomplished during the regular session itself, not during the extended session.


Key Quotes

“A legislative body has no inherent power to convene itself in special or extraordinary session for any purpose. It enjoys such power only when so endowed by the organic law. When such authority is granted by the Constitution it must be exercised strictly in accord with the stipulations of the organic grant.”

Establishes the foundational principle that the legislature's powers are limited to those granted by the Constitution and must be exercised strictly in accordance with constitutional limitations.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

The Florida Legislature's regular biennial session was extended by House Concurrent Resolution No. 2078 to run through June 8, 1957 at midnight. Gover…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

Honorable LeRoy Collins

Governor of Florida

Tallahassee, Florida

Dear Governor:

We have the honor to acknowledge your letter of June 5, 1957, submitting to us under Section 13 of Article IV of the Constitution of Florida, F.S.A. a request for advice relating to your executive powers and' duties. Your letter reads as follows:
“Honorable Glenn Terrell, Chief Justice, and Honorable Justices of the Supreme Court of Florida

“Supreme Court Building

“Tallahassee, Florida

“Gentlemen:

Re: Effect of extended session upon time within which Governor may act upon bills presented to him within last five-days of extended session.

“Section 28 of Article III of the Florida Constitution provides in part:

“ ‘If any bill shall not be returned! within five days after it shall have been presented to the Governor, (Sunday excepted) the same shall be a law, in like manner as if he had signed it. If the Legislature, by its final adjournment prevent such action, such bill shall be a law, unless the Governor within twenty (20) days after the adjournment, shall file such bill with his objections thereto,' in the office of the Secretary of State, who shall lay the same before the Legislature at its next session, and if the same shall receive two-thirds of the votes present it shall become a law.’

“This provision was adopted by the people of Florida at the general election in 1954.

“In 1956, the people adopted an amendment to Section 2 of Article III, reading in part:

“ ‘Regular sessions of the legislature may extend to sixty (60) days, but no special session convened by the governor shall exceed twenty (20) days. Thé regular sixty (60) day biennial session of the legislature may, by a three-fifths vote of the membership of both houses, be extended not exceeding a total of thirty (30) days which need not be-consecutive. Recesses in such extended session shall be taken only by joint action of both houses. No extended session may last beyond September 1st following the regular biennial session. During such extended session, no additional proposed legislation shall be introduced unless consent is first obtained by a two-thirds (%) vote of the members of the House into which it is sought to be introduced.’

“The Legislature, at its current biennial session, has, by House Concurrent Resolution No. 2078, agreed to extend the session through Saturday, June 8th, to midnight. A copy of said resolution is attached.

“As a result of the extension of the regular session for said period of time, I have considered it to be my duty to act upon any bills enacted during the regular session but delivered to me during the extended session, within five days after the same have been presented to me. This has resulted in a large and unanticipated volume of work.

“In addition to the increased burden resulting from the extended session and the pressure of having to act within said five day period as aforesaid, I am now faced with the further problem that large numbers of bills passed during the regular session are now being processed daily by the Legislature and its staffs and presented to me for action. I anticipate that this deluge of bills will increase daily during the remainder of this extended session.

“Under the above circumstances, and pursuant to the authority of Section 13 of Article IV of the Constitution of Florida, I respectfully ask your advice upon the following question:

“Will I have twenty days after June 8 within which to act upon bills reaching me during the last five days of the extended session ?

“As I see it, this necessarily involves the basic question of whether or not the extension provided under the aforesaid resolution is the final action which this Legislature may take in extending the term of the current regular biennial session.

“Respectfully,

“/s/ LeRoy Collins

“Enclosure Governor”

Your question is answered in the affirmative.

By House Concurrent Resolution No. 2078 the regular sixty-day session resolved as follows:

“Section 1. Under the authority of Article III, Section 2, of the constitution, the Legislature of Florida extends ' the present session beginning on Saturday, June 1st through Saturday, June 8th, to twelve (12) o’clock midnight.”

Implicit in your inquiry is the necessity of determining whether the current extension of the regular sixty-day biennial session can be further extended by Concurrent Resolution beyond the terminal date fixed by House Concurrent Resolution No. 2078. In view of the manner in which the present extended session was accomplished we are of the view that the curent extension cannot be further extended.

A legislative body has no inherent power to convene itself in special or extraordinary session for any purpose. It enjoys such power only when so endowed by the organic law. When such authority is granted by the Constitution it must be exercised strictly in accord with the stipulations of the organic grant.

A careful analysis of Section 2,, Article III, as amended in 1956, suggests that only “the regular sixty (60) day biennial session” may be extended. There is no authorization for an extension of an “extended session.” The exercise of the power to extend the “regular session” is explicitly limited to the regular sixty day session by the following language of the Constitution itself, towit:

“The regular sixty (60) day biennial session of the legislature may, by a three-fifths vote of the membership of both houses, be extended * * *.”

So it is that by virtue of the specific language of the Constitution the power to vote an “extension” under Section 2, Article III, expires at the end of the sixtieth day of the regular biennial session.

This leads us to the view that such action as the Legislature takes making provision for an extension of its regular session must be taken during the regular session itself. The Legislature could have provided for an extension of a certain number of days not exceeding thirty and not necessarily consecutive. It then could have recessed from time to time within the extended period by joint action of the two Houses. This course, however, was not employed. Instead the Legislature extended its session for a stipulated period and established a definite terminal date and hour. Having done this it spent its authority under the organic provision quoted.

You may therefore safely assume that you will have twenty (20) days after June 8, 1957 within which to consider and act upon any bills presented to you within five days prior to June 8, 1957.

Nothing herein is to be construed as any limitation on the calling of an extra session under the so-called legislative “self-starter” provisions of Section 2, Article III, Florida Constitution, or your own authority as Governor to convene the Legislature in extraordinary session Under Section 8, Article IV, of the Constitution.

Respectfully,

GLEN TERRELL Chief Justice

ELWYN THOMAS T. FRANK HOBSON B. K. ROBERTS E. HARRIS DREW CAMPBELL THORNAL STEPHEN O’CONNELL Justices


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • W.D. Childers v. Am. Auto. Ass'n, Inc., 424 So. 2d 116 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
    …, as set forth in SCR 1318, control the scope of the measures to be considered. Measures taken up and acted upon outside of the restrictions of the concurrent resolution are not validly enacted, (emphasis added) . See, Advisory Opinion to Governor, 95 So. 2d 603, 606 (Fla.1957): [S]uch action as the Legislature takes making provision for an extension of its regular session must be taken during the regular session itself.…
  • In re Advisory Opinion to the Governor, 225 So. 2d 512 (Fla. 1969)
    …f the actual substance of the problem presented. If the latter requires a construction of the Constitution regarding the Governor’s powers and duties this Court has consistently undertaken to respond to the inquiry. Advisory Opinion to the Governor, 95 So. 2d 603 (Fla.1957); In re Advisory Opinion to the Governor, 132 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1961). We have the view that your letter presents a substantial problem necessitating advice regarding your executive powers and duties under the above-cited provisions of the Fl…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw