What's Happening?
The City of Houston has successfully avoided paying $116,359 in opposing attorney's fees after conceding that it could not enforce a law deemed unconstitutional. The Fifth Circuit Court ruled in favor of the city, which had acknowledged early in the litigation
process that the law banning non-residents from circulating petitions for ballot ordinances was unenforceable. These provisions were identified as 'zombie laws,' meaning they were previously invalidated by courts but had not been removed from the legal code. Despite the Fifth Circuit rejecting Houston's argument that a 2025 Supreme Court decision in Lackey v. Stinnie was relevant to this case, the city still emerged victorious in avoiding the financial penalty.
Why It's Important?
This ruling is significant as it highlights the ongoing issue of 'zombie laws'—laws that remain on the books despite being declared unconstitutional. The case underscores the importance of legal vigilance and the need for municipalities to update their legal codes to prevent the enforcement of outdated and invalid laws. For Houston, avoiding the attorney's fees is a financial relief, but the case also serves as a reminder to other cities to review and amend their legal frameworks. The decision may prompt other jurisdictions to proactively address similar legal anachronisms to avoid costly litigation.
What's Next?
The outcome of this case may lead to increased scrutiny of existing laws across various jurisdictions to ensure compliance with constitutional standards. Legal experts and city officials might collaborate to identify and repeal other 'zombie laws' to prevent future legal challenges. Additionally, this case could influence legislative processes, encouraging lawmakers to establish mechanisms for regularly reviewing and updating legal codes. Stakeholders, including civil rights groups and legal organizations, may advocate for more systematic approaches to legal code maintenance to safeguard against unconstitutional practices.
