Court of Criminal Appeals rules "Walking Quorum" law unconstitutionally vague

Last week, the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas ruled that the criminal sanctions for a "walking quorum" were unconstitutional. In an opinion authored by Presiding Judge Sharon Keller, joined by five other judges, the court found that the walking quorum rules were unconstitutionally vague. The Court held that the provisions of the law did not violate the First Amendment freedom of speech restrictions, but laid out several fact scenarios that were not clearly allowed or disallowed by the rule.

Judge Slaughter concurred, finding that the law was not unconstitutionally vague, but did violate the First Amendment. Judge Yeary dissented, finding that the law was neither unconstitutionally vague nor violative of the First Amendment. Judge Newell also dissented, but did not author or join an opinion.

The fact that the opinion comes out during the legislative session means that a legislative fix is likely. However, as the opinion points out, a majority of the states do not criminalize violations of the open meetings laws, so perhaps the legislature will be satisfied with a non-criminal sanction.

Links to all three opinions can be found at http://search.txcourts.gov/handdown.aspx?coa=coscca&fulldate=02/27/2019.