Constitución del Estado de Georgia

Artículo X. AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION · Artículo X. AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION · Sección I. CONSTITUTION, HOW AMENDED

Art. X, Sec. I, Para. II. Proposals by the General Assembly; submission to the people.

Vigente

Actualizado hasta: Including Acts of the 2025 Regular Session of the General Assembly.

Una disposición constitucional que se muestra como vigente está vigente tal como está impresa en el volumen. Una decisión judicial puede hacer inaplicable una disposición impresa sin cambiar el volumen, y el volumen no registra eso.

El texto siguiente es la ley tal como la imprime el estado, en inglés.

A proposal by the General Assembly to amend this Constitution or to provide for a new Constitution shall originate as a resolution in either the Senate or the House of Representatives and, if approved by two-thirds of the members to which each house is entitled in a roll-call vote entered on their respective journals, shall be submitted to the electors of the entire state at the next general election which is held in the even-numbered years. A summary of such proposal shall be prepared by the Attorney General, the Legislative Counsel, and the Secretary of State and shall be published in the official organ of each county and, if deemed advisable by the ‘‘Constitutional Amendments Publication Board,’’ in not more than 20 other newspapers in the state designated by such board which meet the qualifications for being selected as the official organ of a county. Said board shall be composed of the Governor, the Lieutenant Governor, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. Such summary shall be published once each week for three consecutive weeks immediately preceding the day of the general election at which such proposal is to be submitted. The language to be used in submitting a proposed amendment or a new Constitution shall be in such words as the General Assembly may provide in the resolution or, in the absence thereof, in such language as the Governor may prescribe. A copy of the entire proposed amendment or of a new Constitution shall be filed in the office of the judge of the probate court of each county and shall be available for public inspection; and the summary of the proposal shall so indicate. The General Assembly is hereby authorized to provide by law for additional matters relative to the publication and distribution of proposed amendments and summaries not in conflict with the provisions of this Paragraph.
If such proposal is ratified by a majority of the electors qualified to vote for members of the General Assembly voting thereon in such general election, such proposal shall become a part of this Constitution or shall become a new Constitution, as the case may be. Any proposal so approved shall take effect as provided in Paragraph VI of this article. When more than one amendment is submitted at the same time, they shall be so submitted as to enable the electors to vote on each amendment separately, provided that one or more new articles or related changes in one or more articles may be submitted as a single amendment.

Las notas siguientes se imprimen con la sección, pero no son ley promulgada (O.C.G.A. § 1-1-1(c)). Se muestran aparte del texto.

Editor's notes

The constitutional amendment (Ga. L. 1988, p. 2116, § 2) which would have revised this Paragraph to remove the Attorney General from the committee which prepares the official summary of all proposed constitutional amendments was defeated at the general election on November 8, 1988.

Law reviews

For article discussing the amending process under the Georgia Constitution of 1945 as amended in 1952, see 18 Ga. B.J. 425 (1956). For article discussing venue problems in juvenile court practice and suggesting solutions, see 23 Mercer L. Rev. 341 (1972). For article, ‘‘History of the Veto Power in Georgia,’’ see 8 Ga. St. B.J. 513 (1972). For article discussing the structures placed on substantial governmental restructuring by the concurrent majority principle, and suggesting the unconstitutionality of same, see 10 Ga. L. Rev. 169 (1975). For article, ‘‘The Office of Legislative Counsel,’’ see 23 Ga. St. B.J. 114 (1987). For article, ‘‘Local Government Tort Liability: The Summer of ’92,’’ see 9 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 405 (1993).

Otras notas (31 entradas, tal como están impresas)

1976 Constitution.: Art. XII, Sec. I, Para. I.
Prerequisite to submission of constitutional change to voters.: No question concerning a change in the Constitution, or the creation of a new Constitution, shall ever be placed upon a ballot for submission to the people until the General Assembly has by a two-thirds vote authorized the placing of the proposition on the ballot. Wheeler v. Board of Trustees, 200 Ga. 323, 37 S.E.2d 322 (1946). Judiciary will not interfere during tional amendment, from the time of the introduction of the proposing Act until the electors have acted. Gaskins v. Dorsey, 150 Ga. 638, 104 S.E. 433 (1920). It is a judicial question whether the proposed amendment was properly adopted. Hammond v. Clark, 136 Ga. 313, 71 S.E. 479, 38 L.R.A. (n.s.) 77 (1911); Houser v. Hartley, 157 Ga. 137, 120 S.E. 622 (1923). opted is not conclusive, and courts can inquire into this question. Where it appears that the amendment was not ratified in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution, it must be judicially declared of no force and effect, in that it never became a part of the Constitution. Towns v. Suttles, 208 Ga. 838, 69 S.E.2d 742 (1952). posed amendment permits court to
the formative stage of a constitu-A proclamation by the Governor declaring that an amendment was ad-Interpreting ballot language of prointerject value judgment on voters.: Though ballot language is not a proper subject for more than minimal judicial review, to the extent to which the legislature describes proposed amendments in any way other than through the most objective and brief terms, or perhaps by number as is done in at least one other state, it exposes itself to the temptation to interject its own value judgments concerning the amendments into the ballot language and thus to propagandize the voters in the very voting booth in denigration of the integrity of the ballot. Sears v. State, 232 Ga. 547, 208 S.E.2d 93 (1974). Distribution of the house journals
before election is not required.: Hammond v. Clark, 136 Ga. 313, 71 S.E. 479, 38 L.R.A. (n.s.) 71 (1911). Requirement of publication does not need to be strictly complied with. Hammond v. Clark, 136 Ga. 313, 71 S.E. 479, 38 L.R.A. (n.s.) 77 (1911). General Consideration (Cont’d) Acts need not specify the manner of ers. Hammond v. Clark, 136 Ga. 313, 71 S.E. 479, 38 L.R.A. (n.s.) 77 (1911); Clements v. Powell, 155 Ga. 278, 116 S.E. 624 (1923). Necessary qualities for additional revenue amendment to comply with
submission of an amendment to votdue process and equal protection.: A proposed amendment allowing a school district to receive additional revenues from municipalities for school purposes had to be drafted to include all areas within the county school districts and ratified by the voters of each school district therein on a consolidated basis in order to comply with the due process and equal protection of law requirements under the state and federal Constitutions. City of Lithonia v. DeKalb County Bd. of Educ., 231 Ga. 150, 200 S.E.2d 698 (1973).
Same-sex unions.: Prohibition against recognizing same-sex unions as entitled to the benefits of marriage was not ‘‘dissimilar and discordant’’ to the objective of reserving the status of marriage and its attendant benefits exclusively to unions of man and woman; Ga. Const. 1983, Art. I, Sec. IV, Para. I did not violate the multiple-subject matter rule. Perdue v. O’Kelley, 280 Ga. 732, 632 S.E.2d 110 (2006). Cited in Madronah Sales Co. v. Wilburn, 180 Ga. 837, 181 S.E. 173 (1935); Brackett v. Etheridge, 190 Ga. 216, 9 S.E.2d 275 (1940); McKnight v. City of Decatur, 200 Ga. 611, 37 S.E.2d 915 (1946); Houlihan v. Atkinson, 205 Ga. 720, 55 S.E.2d 233 (1949); Smith v. Hayes, 217 Ga. 94, 121 S.E.2d 113 (1961); Seago v. Richmond County, 218 Ga. 151, 126 S.E.2d 657 (1962); Henson v. Georgia Indus. Realty Co., 220 Ga. 857, 142 S.E.2d 219 (1965); Bedingfield v. Adams, 221 Ga. 69, 142 S.E.2d 915 (1965); Wilson v. Sanders, 222 Ga. 681, 151 S.E.2d 703 (1966); Richmond County v. Richmond County Bus. Ass’n, 228 Ga. 281, 185 S.E.2d 399 (1971); Camp v. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Auth., 229 Ga. 35, 189 S.E.2d 56 (1972); Sims v. Town of Baldwin, 249 Ga. 293, 290 S.E.2d 433 (1982); Goldrush II v. City of Marietta, 267 Ga. 683, 482 S.E.2d 347 (1997). Provision for New Constitution
Procedure validating new Constitution.: Where a new Constitution of the State of Georgia was passed by a two-thirds vote of each branch of the General Assembly, duly advertised and submitted to a vote of the people at a general election, ratified by a majority of the electors at the general election, and duly issued by the Governor in a proclamation, it is a valid and legal expression of the will of the people and has duly and legally been proclaimed the Constitution of Georgia. Wheeler v. Board of Trustees, 200 Ga. 323, 37 S.E.2d 322 (1946). Resolution not amendment but new
Constitution.: Where first paragraph of a resolution of the General Assembly pursuant to this paragraph repeals in its entirety the old Constitution, and then proceeds to create a new Constitution, but the resolution refers to ‘‘one single amendment,’’ the resolution is not an amendment to the Constitution; but on the contrary it is a completely revised or new Constitution. Wheeler v. Board of Trustees, 200 Ga. 323, 37 S.E.2d 322 (1946). Provision for Amending Constitution 1. In General persede other inconsistent parts of that instrument. McWilliams v. Smith, 142 Ga. 209, 82 S.E. 569 (1914). The two important, vital, elements in any constitutional amendment are: the assent of two-thirds of the legislature and a majority of the popular vote; beyond these, other provisions are mere machinery and forms, they may not be disregarded, because by them certainty as to the essentials is secured, but they are not themselves the essentials. Mayer v. Adams, 182 Ga. 524, 186 S.E. 420 (1936). Since substance is more important than form, and the will of the legislature lawfully expressed in proposing an amendment, and the will of the people expressed at the proper time and in the proper manner at the ballot box in ratifying such amendment, they ought not to be lightly disregarded and set at naught, even if an executive or ministerial officer should not strictly comply with the officer’s duty in connection with matters of detail, regarding the publication or the like, and which do not appear to have substantially affected the result. Mayer v. Adams, 182 Ga. 524, 186 S.E. 420 (1936). No limitations are placed by this paragraph on the power of the Gen-guage. Sears v. State, 232 Ga. 547, 208 S.E.2d 93 (1974) (see Ga. Const. 1983, Art. X, Sec. I, Para. II). Voter’s must know what they are
Constitutional amendment will sueral Assembly to draft ballot lanvoting on.: Paragraph’s operative limitation on legislature’s control of ballot language is requirement that language be adequate to enable the voters to ascertain on which amendment they are voting. Sears v. State, 232 Ga. 547, 208 S.E.2d 93 (1974); Donaldson v. DOT, 262 Ga. 49, 414 S.E.2d 638 (1992). Entire amendment need not be printed on the ballot. Goolsby v. Stephens, 155 Ga. 529, 117 S.E. 439 (1923). See also Hammond v. Clark, 136 Ga. 313, 71 S.E. 479, 36 L.R.A. (n.s.) 77 (1911). Reference to proposed amendment
sufficient to inform voters.: A reference on the ballots to proposed amendment is to inform voters what they are voting for as an amendment to the Constitution; and such reference is sufficient when it contains enough to enable the voters to ascertain for what amendment they are voting. Pye v. State Hwy. Dep’t, 226 Ga. 389, 175 S.E.2d 510, cert. denied and appeal dismissed, 400 U.S. 913, 91 S. Ct. 173, 27 L. Ed. 2d 152 (1970).
Amendment may contain legislative Acts previously held invalid.: Hammond v. Clark, 136 Ga. 313, 71 S.E. 479, 38 L.R.A. (n.s.) 71 (1911).
Inoperative amendment.: Amendment to the Constitution of 1877, Ga. L. 1945, p. 101, which was ratified and proclaimed on the same dates as was the Constitution of 1945, never became operative either as an amendment to the Constitution of 1877 or as an amendment to the Constitution of 1945. Fulton County v. Lockhart, 202 Ga. 878, 45 S.E.2d 220 (1947). 2. General Amendment Elections for members of Congress and presidential electors, required by law to be held on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November, is a general election within the meaning of this paragraph. Moore v. Smith, 140 Ga. 854, 79 S.E. 1116 (1913) (see Ga. Const. 1983, Art. X, Sec. I, Para. II). State-wide general election for
specified purposes established.: Proposed amendment to the Constitution as set forth in Ga. L. 1937, p. 13, authorizing the City of Atlanta to issue specified refunding bonds, which was submitted for ratification and duly ratified at a general election provided for in former Ga. L. 1937, p. 712, establishing a state-wide general election each June for specified purposes, including the ratification of constitutional amendments, became effective as part of the Constitution. Aycock v. State ex rel. Boykin, 184 Ga. 709, 193 S.E. 580 (1937).
Test determining violation of multiple subject matter rule.: The test of whether an Act or a constitutional amendment violates the multiple subject matter rule is whether all of the parts of the Act or of the constitutional amendment are germane to the accomplishment of a single objective; if so, it does not violate the rule; otherwise, it does. Carter v. Burson, 230 Ga. 511, 198 S.E.2d 151 (1973); Sears v. State, 232 Ga. 547, 208 S.E.2d 93 (1974); Goldrush II v. City of Marietta, 267 Ga. 683, 482 S.E.2d 347 (1997), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 818, 118 S. Ct. 70, 139 L. Ed. 2d 31 (1997); Perdue v. O’Kelley, 280 Ga. 732, 632 S.E.2d 110 (2006).
Breakdown of amendment not required.: The legislature is not required to break each general objective down into the smallest component elements and submit each separately to the voters for their acceptance or rejection. Were this done, it would be almost impossible to change many constitutional provisions by a single amendment, and such an amendment could not be submitted as a whole, but would have to be broken up into fragments, and submitted in disjointed propositions. Sears v. State, 232 Ga. 547, 208 S.E.2d 93 (1974). Provision for Amending Constitution (Cont’d) 2. General Amendment (Cont’d)
Amendment saved from unconstitutionality because germane to subject of Constitution being amended.: — A constitutional amendment, adopted by the voters in a general election, that deals with only one subject matter, the establishment of area schools, which under the amendment can be established only by contract between counties, or municipalities, or a county and a municipality, or combination thereof, is germane to the provisions of the Constitution, pertaining to the contractual powers of counties and municipalities, and does not violate the Constitution. Cason v. State, 217 Ga. 339, 122 S.E.2d 232 (1961). Georgia Laws 1972, p. 1015, had but a single subject matter, governmental reorganization, and all its parts were germane to a single purpose and therefore not unconstitutional under this paragraph. Carter v. Burson, 230 Ga. 511, 198 S.E.2d 151 (1973) (see Ga. Const. 1983, Art. X, Sec. I, Para. II). 3. Advertisement of Amendment
Publication in newspapers.: Publication of proposed amendments in their entirety in designated newspapers of general circulation prior to election is method by which voters should inform themselves of the contents and merits of proposed amendments. Sears v. State, 232 Ga. 547, 208 S.E.2d 93 (1974).
Duties of legislative branch.: The legislative branch of the government is charged with the duty of providing manner of holding elections and providing for the ballot, and what shall go on the ballot — of course subject to the limitations contained in the Constitution. Wheeler v. Board of Trustees, 200 Ga. 323, 37 S.E.2d 322 (1946). Every reasonable presumption, both of law and fact, is to be indulged in favor of the validity of a Constitution when it is attacked after its ratification by the people. Wheeler v. Board of Trustees, 200 Ga. 323, 37 S.E.2d 322 (1946). ing requirements applies rather to tional requirements in regard to amendments than to a total omission or disregard of such a requirement. Mayer v.Adams, 182 Ga. 524, 186 S.E. 420 (1936). Law imposes no duty upon the Secretary of State with regard to publiposed amendment to the Constitution. Horrigan v. Rivers, 183 Ga. 141, 187 S.E. 836 (1936). eral Assembly as a whole; it has no reference to the Speaker of the House of Representatives or the President of the Senate in their individual capacities. Horrigan v. Rivers, 183 Ga. 141, 187 S.E. 836 (1936) (see Ga. Const. 1983, Art. X, Sec. I, Para. II). tive officers not bound to submit
Liberal interpretation of advertismanner of compliance with constitucation or advertisement of a pro-This paragraph refers to the Gen-Absence imposition of duty legislaamendment to voters.: Where it appears that no specific legislative action was taken by the General Assembly imposing a duty upon either the President of the Senate or Speaker of the House of Representatives to procure the proper submission to the people of a proposed constitutional amendment, there is no duty resting upon either of these officers to bring about such submission, and a writ of mandamus would not lie against them to compel action in the premises. Horrigan v. Rivers, 183 Ga. 141, 187 S.E. 836 (1936).
Distinguishing Constitution between legal and revolutionary one.: If a Constitution is to be a legal one, as distinguished from a revolutionary Constitution, it must be adopted by the people by compliance with the legal machinery in operation at the time of its adoption in order to obtain a legal expression of the will of the people. Wheeler v. Board of Trustees, 200 Ga. 323, 37 S.E.2d 322 (1946). Brief and concise summary of
amendment need not be published.: An amendment to the Constitution of this state, duly proposed by the General Assembly and published for 60 days before the election in one or more papers in each congressional district, will not be declared by the courts to have been illegally submitted to the people because a brief and concise summary thereof was not published in a newspaper carrying the sheriff’s advertisements in a certain county. Cartledge v. City Council, 189 Ga. 267, 5 S.E.2d 661 (1939). Failure of three counties out of 159 to open polls on day when a constitutional amendment is being voted upon would not affect the validity of its submission to the people or of the election itself. Cartledge v. City Council, 189 Ga. 267, 5 S.E.2d 661 (1939). Substantial compliance sufficient
to uphold validity of amendment.: Where there is substantial compliance with this paragraph, and the irregularities complained of were not such as could be said to affect the result, the validity of the ratification of a proposed amendment must be upheld. Mayer v. Adams, 182 Ga. 524, 186 S.E. 420 (1936) (see Ga. Const. 1983, Art. X, Sec. I, Para. II). 4. Submission to Voters Amendment becomes a part of the jority of the electors qualified to vote for members of the General Assembly voting thereon. McCullers v. Williamson, 221 Ga. 358, 144 S.E.2d 911 (1965). An amendment can by its own tive’’ date to a time subsequent to the date when it becomes a part of the Constitution and this is not altered by the fact that the Constitution provides that an amendment becomes a part of the Constitution when it is ratified. McCullers v. Williamson, 221 Ga. 358, 144 S.E.2d 911 (1965).
Constitution when ratified by a materms defer its ‘‘effective’’ or ‘‘opera1990 amendment upheld.: The ratification of the 1990 amendment to Ga. Const. 1983, Art. I, Sec. II, Para. IX was not invalid on the grounds that the ballot language was inaccurate, affirmatively misleading, not complete enough, or did not include enough of the history of the amendment. Donaldson v. DOT, 262 Ga. 49, 414 S.E.2d 638 (1992).
Amendments Publication Board.: This paragraph does not establish the Constitutional Amendments Publication Board; however, the General Assembly was authorized to establish the board since this paragraph states that amendments shall be published ‘‘as provided by law.’’ 1974 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 74-127 (see Ga. Const. 1983, Art. X, Sec. I, Para. II). Executive and legislative branch members eligible for service on
board.: Contracting for publication of proposed amendments is not an executive function, since no existing law is being executed by the Governor or other executive officers but rather an amendment to the fundamental legislation, the Constitution, is being proposed to the people; therefore, the presence of the Speaker of the House on the Constitutional Amendments Publication Board does not conflict with the separation of powers requirement of the Constitution of Georgia because the unique and sole function of the Constitutional Amendments Publication Board is to submit constitutional amendments to the people, by proper publication; and, furthermore, members of both the executive and legislative branches may serve on the board. 1974 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 74-127. It would require the vote of 137 of the 205 members of the House (House General Consideration (Cont’d) now consists of 180 members) to pass a constitutional amendment, notwithstanding that there exist vacancies in the House, in that the reference to the two-thirds of the members elected would obviously refer to two-thirds of the total membership of the House; the existence of a vacancy for whatever reason would not be the basis for the reduction of the requisite number of votes of the total membership of the House to adopt a constitutional amendment. 1962 Op. Att’y Gen. p. 259. Provision for Amendment 1. Advertisement of Amendment County newspaper may be selected lication Board, so long as this newspaper is designated as ‘‘official organ of that County,’’ for the publishing of general constitutional amendments as provided in this paragraph. 1976 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 76-71 (see Ga. Const. 1983, Art. X, Sec. I, Para. II). terpreted to refer to the character of the newspaper and of its circulation rather than to the mere number of its readers. 1976 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 76-71. Two criteria for general circulation are: (1) publication of news of general interest, such as national, state, and local news; and (2) circulation among the general public either by subscription or from newsstands. 1974 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 74-127. ‘‘One’’ must be construed to mean ‘‘only one’’ and the Constitutional Amendments Publication Board is therefore authorized to place advertisements for general amendments in only one newspaper in each congressional district; the newspaper chosen must be published, as well as circulated, within the congressional district; one newspaper of general circulation should be selected in each congressional district for publication of general amendments. 1974 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 74-127. cation Board in its discretion may contract to pay rates in excess of rate authorized by former Code 1933,
by Constitutional Amendments Pub-Phrase ‘‘newspaper of general circulation’’ has unanimously been in-Constitutional Amendments Publi-§ 39-1105 (see now O.C.G.A.: § 9-13-143) where reasonably necessary to provide notice to the people of the proposed amendments. 1974 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 74-127.
Minimum advertising time.: Any constitutional amendment must be passed and submitted by General Assembly in sufficient time prior to general election to be advertised once a week for three weeks prior thereto. 1962 Op. Att’y Gen. p. 258. Method of advertisement legally
permissible.: General Assembly could legally convene and submit to electorate proposed constitutional amendments after democratic primary but in sufficient time prior to general election to be properly advertised. 1962 Op. Att’y Gen. p. 258. 2. Submission to Voters Majority vote sufficient to pass a ity of votes cast and need not be a majority of the total electors entitled to vote. 1962 Op. Att’y Gen. p. 197.
constitutional amendment is a major-Am. Jur. 2d.: 16 Am. Jur. 2d, Constitutional Law, §§ 13 et seq., 19 et seq., 107 et seq.
C.J.S.: 16 C.J.S., Constitutional Law, §§ 20 et seq., 34, 37, 48, 52 et seq.
ALR.: Construction of requirement that proposed constitutional amendment be entered in journals, 6 ALR 1227; 41 ALR 640. Repeal of constitutional provision or amendment, 36 ALR 1456. Construction of requirement that proposed constitutional amendment be entered in journals, 41 ALR 640. Applicability of constitutional requirements as to legislation or constitutional amendments, to statutes or constitutional amendments under provision conferring initiative or referendum powers, 62 ALR 1349. Construction and application of constitutional or statutory provisions expressly excepting certain laws from referendum, 146 ALR 284; 100 ALR2d 314. Effect of modification or repeal of constitutional or statutory provision adopted by reference in another provision, 168 ALR 627. Removal or suspension of constitutional limitation as affecting statute previously enacted, 171 ALR 1070. Construction and application of constitutional or statutory provisions expressly excepting certain laws from referendum, 100 ALR2d 314. Capacity of taxpayers to maintain suit to enjoin submission of initiative, referendum, or recall measure to voters, 6 ALR2d 557. Injunctive relief against submission of constitutional amendment, statute, municipal charter, or municipal ordinance, on ground that proposed action would be unconstitutional, 19 ALR2d 519. Validity of legislation relating to publication of legal notices, 26 ALR2d 655. Power of legislative body to amend, repeal, or abrogate initiative or referendum measure, or to enact measure defeated on referendum, 33 ALR2d 1118.

Leer la página oficial (el PDF del estado, abierto en la página de la que se leyó este texto).

Actualizado hasta: Including Acts of the 2025 Regular Session of the General Assembly.

Texto leído de 2ga-const-(v2)-2016-pdf.pdf, Volumen V2, edición 2016, páginas 1454 a 1461; acción de fusión: annotated; SHA-256 del archivo 1b27199d8655.