Montana Attorney General Opinion 15-92

Opinion No. 92 Legislatur·~Statlites-Amendments­ Appl'opriations-Constitutional Law. HELD: That one session of the leg- islature has authority to amend an ap- propriation law enacted by a previous session: pro\'ided, tha t such amendment <loes not violate specific prm'isions of the Constitution. February 28, 1933. Your request for advice regarding the power of the leic,'isla ture now in "es- sion to amend appropriation bills passell in InS1 has been received. Speaking generally, the legislature has autholity to expressly or impliedl~' amend any law, including a measure appropriating 1mblic money, in so far as it is suseeptible of amendment at the time. 59 C. .J. 2:38-240. 259-261. 851- 858; 12 C. J. 805-807.' . In amending the appropIiation bills mentioned above, or any of them, care must be taken not to impair the obliga- tion of any contract now existing be- tween the state antI an indil'idual or prinlte corporation, as an amendment of that character would be innllid. Section 11 of Article iII of the Consti- tution: State SaYings Bank Y. Barrett. 25 Mont, 112: 1 Cooley's Constitutional Limitation; 12 C .• J. 996-H99. 'Ye "ish, also, in conection with this matter to direct your attention to the fact that the legislative assembly must not pass any law which incrpases or diminishes the salaries of state officel's after theil' election o~ the salaries of certain other state officers after their appointment. Section 31 of Article V of the Constitution; State ex reI. Jack- son v. Porter, 57 )Iont. 343; 46 C. J. 1021-1024.