---
title: Ga. Const. Art. III, Sec. VI, Para. I. General powers.
collection: code
id: ga-const:art-iii-sec-vi-para-i
cite_as: Ga. Const. Art. III, Sec. VI, Para. I
canonical_url: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-iii-sec-vi-para-i
md_url: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-iii-sec-vi-para-i.md
text_url: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-iii-sec-vi-para-i/text
source_url: https://www.legis.ga.gov/api/document/docs/default-source/joint-features-document-library/2ga-const-(v2)-2016-pdf.pdf?sfvrsn=f5de823e_0#page=858
date: 2016
status: active
corpus_version: 2025-supplement-89aa39ab3c68
license: CC0-1.0
publisher: Georgia Commons, an independent project of Georgia Civic Data. Not the State of Georgia. Not legal advice.
up: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/index.md
previous: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-iii-sec-v-para-xiv.md
next: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-iii-sec-vi-para-ii.md
index: https://georgiacommons.org/code/index.md
omitted: notes
omitted_chars: 4163
omitted_url: https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-iii-sec-vi-para-i.md?notes=all&start=11979
version: the only printed version
in_force: true
current_through: Including Acts of the 2025 Regular Session of the General Assembly
heading_path: CONSTITUTION OF THE / LEGISLATIVE BRANCH / EXERCISE OF POWERS
---

# Ga. Const. Art. III, Sec. VI, Para. I. General powers.

A constitution provision shown as in force is in force as printed in the volume. A court decision can make a printed provision unenforceable without changing the volume, and the volume does not record that.

The General Assembly shall have the power to make all laws not inconsistent with this Constitution, and not repugnant to the Constitution of the United States, which it shall deem necessary and proper for the welfare of the state.

## Cross References

Power of the judiciary to declare void those Acts which are repugnant to the Constitution, Ga. Const. 1983, Art. I, Sec. II, Para. V. Limited power to make laws during special sessions, Ga. Const. 1983, Art. V, Sec. II, Para. VII.

## Law Reviews

For article discussing extent of state legislative power, see 12 Ga. B.J. 147 (1949). For article, ‘‘History of the Veto Power in Georgia,’’see 8 Ga. St. B.J. 513 (1972).

For note examining commercial arbitration in Georgia, and advocating incorporation into law of essential features of the Uniform Arbitration Act, see 12 Ga. L. Rev. 323 (1978).

For comment on Rogers v. Medical Ass’n, 244 Ga. 151, 259 S.E.2d 85 (1979), as to unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority to a private organization, see 29 Emory L.J. 1183 (1980).

## 1976 Constitution.

Art. III, Sec. VIII, Para. I.

## Legislature.

This paragraph and Ga. Const. 1976, Art. I, Sec. II, Para. IV (see Ga. Const. 1983, Art. I, Sec. II, Para. III) vest the power of making laws in the legislature, which cannot be divested by contract. Harrick v. Rouse, 17 Ga. 56 (1855); Daly v. Harris, 33 Ga. 38 (1864); Orr v. James, 159 Ga. 237, 125 S.E. 468 (1924) (see Ga. Const. 1983, Art. III, Sec. VI, Para. I).

Cannot enact measures prohibited

## By State or Federal Constitution.

Legislature is absolutely unrestricted in its power to legislate, so long as it does not undertake to enact measures prohibited by the state or federal Constitution. Georgia Power Co. v. Allied Chem. Corp., 233 Ga. 558, 212 S.E.2d 628 (1975); Bryan v. Georgia Pub. Serv. Comm’n, 238 Ga. 572, 234 S.E.2d 784 (1977).

This paragraph is a limitation on power of General Assembly. Blackmon v. Golia, 231 Ga. 381, 202 S.E.2d 186 (1973) (see Ga. Const. 1983, Art. III, Sec. VI, Para. I).

## Discretion of Legislature as to Determination of Public Interest.

Large discretion is necessarily vested in the legislature to determine: (a) what the interests of the public require; and (b) what measures are necessary for the protection of such interests. Mack v. Westbrook, 148 Ga. 690, 98 S.E. 339 (1919). ture and United States Congress in their power to make laws is that the former can do all things not prohibited by the Constitution, while the latter can exercise no power not delegated to it by the states in the United States Constitution. Plumb v. Christie, 103 Ga. 686, 30 S.E. 759 (1898).

## Difference Between State legisla-Public Welfare Must Be Protected.

Walker v. Whitehead, 43 Ga. 538 (1871), rev’d on other grounds, 83 U.S. 314, 21 L. Ed. 357 (1872).

Scope of the police power is to protect the public morals, the public health and safety, without a denial of equal protection of the laws. Georgia S. & Fla. Ry. v. Adkins, 156 Ga. 826, 120 S.E. 610 (1923).

Comprehended in this broad power to ‘‘make all laws’’ is power to change

## Or Modify Existing Laws.

A law enacted by one General Assembly is subject to repeal or modification by the same or a subsequent General Assembly. State Bd. of Educ. v. County Bd. of Educ., 190 Ga. 588, 10 S.E.2d 369 (1940).

There is a strong presumption in favor of the constitutionality of a statute. Bryan v. Georgia Pub. Serv. Comm’n, 238 Ga. 572, 234 S.E.2d 784 (1977).

Federal government, in exercise of its exclusive prerogative to wage war, cannot be interfered with by state legislation. City of Atlanta v. Stokes, 175 Ga. 201, 165 S.E. 270 (1932).

Cited in Green v. Harper, 177 Ga. 680, 170 S.E. 872 (1933); Miller v. Head, 186 Ga. 694, 198 S.E. 680 (1938); Tripp v. Martin, 210 Ga. 284, 79 S.E.2d 521 (1954); Village of N. Atlanta v. Cook, 219 Ga. 316, 133 S.E.2d 585 (1963); Jones v. Balkcom, 222 Ga. 201, 149 S.E.2d 97 (1966); Sams v. Olah, 225 Ga. 497, 169 S.E.2d 790 (1969); Carroway v. Stynchcombe, 225 Ga. 586, 170 S.E.2d 396 (1969); Ray v. Hand, 225 Ga. 589, 170 S.E.2d 692 (1969); Sears v. State, 232 Ga. 547, 208 S.E.2d 93 (1974); Harrell v. Courson, 234 Ga. 350, 216 S.E.2d 105 (1975); Atlanta Journal v. Hill, 257 Ga. 398, 359 S.E.2d 913 (1987); Arneson v. Board of Trustees, 257 Ga. 579, 361 S.E.2d 805 (1987); Crump Ins. Servs. v. All Risks, Ltd., 315 Ga. App. 490, 727 S.E.2d 131 (2012).

Specific Cases

Delegation of legislative power to

## The Voters.

Legislature may submit to electorate question whether legislation framed and approved by General Assembly shall become operative. An Act is not unconstitutional and void for the reason that it delegates legislative power to the voters. Hines v. Etheridge, 173 Ga. 870, 162 S.E. 113 (1931). tract is not unlimited, but is subject to regulation. City of Dawson v. Dawson Tel. Co., 137 Ga. 62, 72 S.E. 508 (1911); Railroad Comm’n v. Louisville & N.R.R., 140 Ga. 817, 80 S.E. 327 (1913); Union Dry Goods Co. v. Georgia Pub. Serv. Corp., 142 Ga. 841, 83 S.E. 946 (1914), aff’d, 248 U.S. 372, 39 S. Ct. 117, 63 L. Ed. 309 (1919); Union Dry Goods Co. v. Georgia Pub. Serv. Corp., 248 U.S. 372, 39 S. Ct. 117, 63 L. Ed. 309 (1919).

## Under Police Power Right to con-Power to Regulate Occupations.

Under the police power, laws may be passed regulating common occupations which, from their nature, afford opportunity for fraud and imposition. Bazemore v. State, 121 Ga. 619, 49 S.E. 701 (1905).

## Act Regulating Business of Photography Unconstitutional.

The Act approved March 25, 1937, Ga. L. 1937, p. 280 (former Code 1933, Ch. 84-23) establishing a state board of photographic examiners, and providing, among other things, that except as to stated classes, persons desiring to engage in the business of photography or photofinishing must stand an examination and thereby qualify as to competency, ability, and integrity, and denouncing as a crime a violation of any of the terms of the Act, is unconstitutional and void as an exercise of the police power, in that the prescribed regulations are imposed upon a lawful business, and considered as a whole do not bear any reasonable or substantial relation to the public health, safety, or morality, or other phase of the general welfare. Bramley v. State, 187 Ga. 826, 2 S.E.2d 647 (1939).

State can fix the interest rate and

## Regulate Business of Lending Money.

King v. State, 136 Ga. 709, 71 S.E. 1093 (1911).

## Regulation of Municipal Corporations.

A municipal corporation is a creature of legislation, and its modes of government and the officers conducting the same may be changed by the legislature. Churchill v. Walker, 68 Ga. 681 (1882).

## Power to Set Standards for Municipal Incorporation.

It is in the power of the legislature to decide when a given locality has a sufficient number of inhabitants to entitle it to be incorporated as a city. Mattox v. State, 115 Ga. 212, 41 S.E. 709 (1902).

Selection of state judge cannot be

## Left to Municipal Corporation.

The creation of state courts is a sovereign state function, and they can be created only by the General Assembly; the creation of such courts involves the appointment or Specific Cases (Cont’d) the selection of the judges and of the necessary court officers, and this phase of the creation of the court is likewise a function of the state and cannot be delegated by the General Assembly to a lesser governmental unit of the state, and certainly not to municipal corporations. City of Atlanta v. Landers, 212 Ga. 111, 90 S.E.2d 583 (1955). nicipal authorities not to try state

## Court Created Subordinate to Muoffenses.

The legislature has no power to establish a municipal court, or police court, and make it subordinate to the will of the municipal authorities, and at the same time to confer upon it jurisdiction to try offenses against the state when committed within the limits of the municipal corporation. City of Atlanta v. Landers, 212 Ga. 111, 90 S.E.2d 583 (1955).

Act granting municipality power

## Over Streets Valid.

An Act conferring on a municipal corporation the power to grade, pave, and improve its streets and sidewalks, and to assess the real estate abutting on each side of the street is valid. Hayden v. City of Atlanta, 70 Ga. 817 (1883).

## Regulation of Municipal Corporations.

Just as the General Assembly is limited by Ga. Const. 1983, Art. III, Sec. VI, Para. I in its conduct relative to municipal corporations, so is a state agency limited in its conduct relative to municipal corporations by laws passed by the General Assembly pursuant to Ga. Const. 1983, Art. III, Sec. VI, Para. I. DOT v. City of Atlanta, 255 Ga. 124, 337 S.E.2d 327 (1985).

For distinction between valid and invalid ordinance, see Badkins v. Robinson, 53 Ga. 613 (1875).

Zoning ordinance prohibiting the tricts not valid. Smith v. City of Atlanta, 161 Ga. 769, 132 S.E. 66, cert. denied, 271 U.S. 672, 46 S. Ct. 486, 70 L. Ed. 1144 (1926).

Former ‘‘Steinberg Act’’ (former O.C.G.A. § 36-67-1 et seq.), providing for zoning proposal review procedures in urbanized counties, did not unconstitutionally bind the local government in any way nor infringe on the local government’s ability to ‘‘exercise the power of zoning.’’ Northridge Community Ass’n v. Fulton County, 257 Ga. 722, 363 S.E.2d 251 (1988).

## Holding of Stores in Residential dis-Regulation of Soliciting.

Soliciting for hotels, bathhouses, physicians, or similar enterprises may be prohibited in the exercise of the police power. Jackson v. Beavers, 156 Ga. 71, 118 S.E. 751 (1923).

Sale of spirituous liquors may be

## Regulated Under the Police Power.

Plumb v. Christie, 103 Ga. 686, 30 S.E. 759 (1898).

## Delegation of Power to Make Appointments Unconstitutional.

The General Assembly may, within constitutional limitations, establish qualifications for public office and designate a governmental appointing authority; but it cannot delegate the appointive power to a private organization; thus, where the Medical Association of Georgia, a private organization, controlled the appointment of the members of the State Board of Medical Examiners under former Code 1933, §§ 84-903 and 84-1201 (see now O.C.G.A. § 43-34-22) which provided that the Governor must appoint from its nominees, the Act violated this paragraph. Rogers v. Medical Ass’n, 244 Ga. 151, 259 S.E.2d 85 (1979) (decided prior to 1997 amendment; see Ga. Const. 1983, Art. III, Sec. VI, Para. I).

Under this paragraph, legislature may prescribe a rule for the measure of damages. Clay v. Cent. R.R. & Banking Co., 84 Ga. 345, 10 S.E. 967 (1890) (see Ga. Const. 1983, Art. III, Sec. VI, Para. I). ent power to regulate public utilities, independent of Ga. Const. 1976, Art. III, Sec. VIII, Para. IX (see Ga. Const. 1983, Art. III, Sec. VI, Para. V). Georgia Power Co. v.Allied Chem. Corp., 233 Ga. 558, 212 S.E.2d 628 (1975).

Grant of power to Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia

## General Assembly Possesses Inherconstitutional.

Former Code 1933, § 32-121 (see now O.C.G.A. § 20-3-31), declaring that the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia shall have power to exercise any power usually granted to such corporation, necessary to its usefulness, which is not in conflict with the Constitution and laws of this state, is not inconsistent with this paragraph. Villyard v. Regents of Univ. Sys., 204 Ga. 517, 50 S.E.2d 313 (1948) (see Ga. Const. 1983, Art. III, Sec. VI, Para. I).

## Adoption.

Trial court abused the court’s discretion by denying a foster parent’s petition to adopt the foster child on the ground that placing the child with the foster parent violated the state’s public policy because all of the evidence showed that the adoption would be in the child’s best interest, and the trial court failed to apply the law as written and determine whether it was in the child’s best interest to allow the adoption; as long as the adoption laws are constitutional, neither the superior court nor the court of appeals has the authority to amend the law to establish what the court deems are better qualifications for those seeking to adopt. In re Goudeau, 305 Ga. App. 718, 700 S.E.2d 688 (2010).


> The printed notes continue for 4,163 more characters, not shown here. Continue at https://georgiacommons.org/constitution/ga/art-iii-sec-vi-para-i.md?notes=all&start=11979