Sunset Clause Versus Repeal Clause

Sunset Clause Versus Repeal Clause By Chris Micheli

            What is the difference between a sunset clause and a repeal clause in California legislation?

I could only find two California Code sections using a sunset date, both of which are concerning the “sunset” or expiration of an existing tax. On the other hand, there are thousands of instances of the term “repeal” or “repealed” being used in state statutes.

The answer the question is none. The difference is that the technical term is “repeal clause” (other jurisdictions often refer to it as a “repealer clause”), while the commonly-used term is “sunset clause” or “sunset date.”

While either term can be used, repeal date and repeal clause are the better terms and should be used more regularly. Nonetheless, we see “sunset date” even in legislation. For example, there were bills in the 2024 California Legislative Session that stated, for example:

“The bill would remove the January 1, 2025, sunset date, thereby extending the operation of the statute.”

“This bill would delete the January 1, 2029, sunset date described above.”

The reason it is more appropriate to use repeal is because that is what is being done by a so-called “sunset clause.” And, in statute, we always use the term “repeal.”

For example, statutory language in California provides: “This article shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2032, and is repealed on December 1, 2032.” We do not say “is sunsetted” or “sunsets” on a specified date in California law.

            So, while in everyday conversations we are likely to talk about “sunset clauses” and “sunset dates,” when drafting state legislation or formally discussing these provisions, we should use the term “repeal” because that is what these provisions actually do – they repeal a statute or group of statutes.

Remember, there are three actions, or a combination of them, that can take place with a bill in the California Legislature: add (a new law), amend (an existing law), or repeal (an existing law), but not “sunset (an existing law).”

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Another Reason to Limit Bill Introductions?

Another Reason to Limit Bill Introductions?  By Chris Micheli             As I did my final review of Governor Newsom’s actions on the 1,046 bills sent to him after the 2023 Legislative Session, I noticed that some of the Governor’s veto messages provide additional rationales for limiting bill introductions.             Out of 156 vetoes from the 2023 Session, the number one reason for the Governor’s veto was budget concerns or cost pressures. In fact, 41% of the vetoes used that basis. That by itself is not a reason to limit bill introductions, but another statistic may provide such a reason…             By my count, just over 1/3 of the bills vetoed by Governor Newsom likely should not have been sent to his Desk and, arguably, should not have made it through the process at all. In fact, perhaps they should not h...
Read more

Frequently Asked Questions about California’s Budget Process

Frequently Asked Questions about California’s Budget Process  By Chris Micheli             What are the main parts of the California state budget? They are the Budget Bill, Budget Bill Junior, Trailer Bills, and Supplemental Reports.             What is the Budget Bill? This bill contains the appropriations and “Budget Bill Language”. Note that only a Budget Bill (or BBJ) can contain multiple appropriations. It requires a majority vote for passage and the bill takes effect immediately. There is just one Budget Bill. What is the “Budget Bill Jr.”? This is the bill that amends the main Budget Bill by making changes to multiple appropriations. There are often multiple BBJs. What is a Trailer Bill? This bill makes the statutory changes needed to implement the budget. It is the same as any other bill, but it takes effect immediately with a majority vote if it contain...
Read more

Can Any Bill Call an Election?

Can Any Bill Call an Election?  By Chris Micheli             In June 2024, we saw two bills that contain a provision to call an election.             Both bills contain a “plus” section at the end of the bill, which is an uncodified statute, stating the following: “this act calls an election within the meaning of Article IV of the California Constitution and shall go into immediate effect.” Such a measure only requires a majority vote, unless some other constitutional provision requires a higher vote threshold (e.g., a tax increase). What is the basis for this statement? Section 8(c)(3) of Article IV of the state Constitution provides: “ Statutes calling elections, statutes providing for tax levies or appropriations for the usual current expenses of the State, and urgency statutes shall go into effect immediately upon their enactment.” However, there is no further gui...
Read more