Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
STATE of Mississippi, Petitioner v. Robert Shuler SMITH, et al., Respondents.
ORDER
This matter is before the Court en banc on the State of Mississippi's Combined Petition for Interlocutory Appeal and Motion to Vacate Permanent Injunction. Also before the Court is the Response in Opposition filed by Robert Shuler Smith, et al. In addition, various amicus briefs have been filed and are before the Court.
After due consideration, the Court finds that the Petition for Interlocutory Appeal is well taken and should be granted. The Court also finds that further record preparation and briefing is not needed, and the merits of the petition may be decided at this time. The Court further finds that Cause No. 2013–TS–01241–SCT, which is a direct appeal from the same trial court order, will be decided at this time, without further record preparation or briefing.
On July 12, 2013, a Circuit Judge of the Circuit Court of the First Judicial District of Hinds County, Mississippi, entered an Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Injunctive Relief. The Circuit Judge found House Bill 2 to be unconstitutionally vague and ordered that House Bill 2 shall not take effect until such time as the Mississippi Legislature reviews, amends, or clarifies the Bill.
This Court has recognized that “a governmental enactment is impermissibly vague where it fails to provide persons of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity to understand what conduct it prohibits.” Mayor & Bd. of Aldermen, City of Clinton v. Welch, 888 So.2d 416, 421 (Miss.2004). We have held that “statutes must clearly warn what conduct is prohibited when evaluated by common understanding and practice, and that a rule is not objectionable merely because it is stated in general terms.” State ex rel. Hood v. Louisville Tire Center, Inc., 55 So.3d 1068, 1072 (Miss.2011).
This Court now finds that the Circuit Judge erred as a matter of law when he found House Bill 2 to be vague and, therefore, unconstitutional. He also erred when he stated that “a reasonable person reading the bill could not discern what the law allows and what it prohibits.” Therefore, the Petition for Interlocutory Appeal is granted and rendered, and the Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Injunctive Relief is vacated.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the State of Mississippi's Combined Petition for Interlocutory Appeal and Motion to Vacate Permanent Injunction is hereby granted.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Injunctive Relief, entered on July 12, 2013, in Cause No. 251–13–595CIV, in the Circuit Court of the First Judicial District of Hinds County, Mississippi, is hereby vacated.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the appeal in Cause No. 2013–TS–01241–SCT is hereby dismissed. Costs of the appeal are assessed to the Appellees.
SO ORDERED.
RANDY GRANT PIERCE, Justice for the Court:
TO GRANT AND RENDER: ALL JUSTICES.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: Nos. 2013–IA–01220–SCT, 2013–TS–01241–SCT.
Decided: August 29, 2013
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)