Compare IA HR 48 (2011) and IA HR 49 (2011)
The introduced text of these two bills, side by side, with the wording they share.
- IA HR 48 (2011) · Iowa · 2011 · Failed
- IA HR 49 (2011) · Iowa · 2011 · Failed
337 shared 8-word phrases found in the introduced text of these two bills.
This highlights wording the two bills share in their introduced text. A shared passage may include text that both bills quote from the same existing law, not only language either one drafted. A match shows that the texts overlap; it does not show who drafted a bill, and filing order alone does not show which bill copied which.
| IA HR 48 (2011) | IA HR 49 (2011) |
|---|---|
| House Resolution 48 - Introduced HOUSE RESOLUTION NO. 48 BY SHAW , ALONS , DE BOEF , MASSIE , and PEARSON A Resolution impeaching Supreme Court | House Resolution 49 - Introduced HOUSE RESOLUTION NO. 49 BY SHAW , ALONS , DE BOEF , MASSIE , and PEARSON A Resolution impeaching Supreme Court |
| for malfeasance in office. 2 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, That 3 Supreme Court | for malfeasance in office. 2 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 3 That Supreme Court |
| is impeached 4 for malfeasance in office, and that the following 5 article of impeachment be exhibited and presented to 6 the Senate: 7 That Supreme Court | is impeached 4 for malfeasance in office, and that the following 5 article of impeachment be exhibited and presented to 6 the Senate: 7 That Supreme Court |
| in 8 violation of his constitutional oath undertaken before 9 taking office to support the Constitution of the United 10 States and the Constitution of the State of Iowa, has 11 committed malfeasance in office through his action to 12 sanction marriage between persons of the same sex in 13 the Varnum v. Brien, 763 N.W.2d 862 (Iowa 2009), ruling 14 issued on April 3, 2009, by the following conduct: 15 ARTICLE I 16 By unconstitutionally exercising functions properly 17 belonging to the legislative and executive departments 18 as follows: 19 (1) By his action in the Varnum case, Chief Justice 20 Cady improperly assumed the function and role of an 21 elected legislator by ordering that the lang… | in 8 violation of his constitutional oath undertaken before 9 taking office to support the Constitution of the United 10 States and the Constitution of the State of Iowa, has 11 committed malfeasance in office through his action to 12 sanction marriage between persons of the same sex in 13 the Varnum v. Brien, 763 N.W.2d 862 (Iowa 2009), ruling 14 issued on April 3, 2009, by the following conduct: 15 ARTICLE I 16 By unconstitutionally exercising functions properly 17 belonging to the legislative and executive departments 18 as follows: 19 (1) By his action in the Varnum case, Justice Hecht 20 improperly assumed the function and role of an elected 21 legislator by ordering that the language… |
| delegated solely and exclusively to the 1 legislative department of declaring public policy, 2 through his judicial declaration of a new public policy 3 contrary to long-standing public policy acknowledged 4 by society and established in Iowa Code section 595.2, 5 subsection 1. 6 (3) By his action in the Varnum case, Chief Justice 7 Cady has improperly required the executive department 8 to issue marriage licenses to parties of the same sex 9 in direct contravention of Iowa Code section 595.2. 10 (4) By his action in the Varnum case, Chief Justice 11 Cady has created a constitutional crisis regarding the 12 enforcement of the Varnum ruling by allowing different 13 interpretations of the def… | delegated solely and exclusively to the legislative 1 department of declaring public policy, through his 2 judicial declaration of a new public policy contrary to 3 long-standing public policy acknowledged by society and 4 established in Iowa Code section 595.2, subsection 1. 5 (3) By his action in the Varnum case, Justice Hecht 6 has improperly required the executive department to 7 issue marriage licenses to parties of the same sex in 8 direct contravention of Iowa Code section 595.2. 9 (4) By his action in the Varnum case, Justice Hecht 10 has created a constitutional crisis regarding the 11 enforcement of the Varnum ruling by allowing different 12 interpretations of the definition of ma… |
| in 26 committing malfeasance in office, warrants impeachment, 27 trial by the Senate, and removal and disqualification 28 from any office of honor, trust, or profit under the 29 state pursuant to the procedures set out in Iowa Code | in 25 committing malfeasance in office, warrants impeachment, 26 trial by the Senate, and removal and disqualification 27 from any office of honor, trust, or profit under the 28 state pursuant to the procedures set out in Iowa Code |