If a provision of a statute or rule or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect other provisions or applications of the statute or rule that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of the statute or rule are severable.
History: Laws 1997, ch. 173, § 9.
ANNOTATIONSEffective dates. — Laws 1997, ch. 173, § 22 made the Uniform Statute and Rule Construction Act effective July 1, 1997.
When valid portion of partially invalid statute remains in force. — A part of the law may be unconstitutional and the remainder of it valid, where the objectionable part may be properly separated from the other without impairing the force and effect of the portion which remains, and where the legislative purpose as expressed in such valid portion can be accomplished and given effect, independently of the void provisions, and where if the entire act is taken into consideration it cannot be said that the enacting power would not have passed the portion retained had it known that the void provisions must fall. State v. Frawley, 2007-NMSC-057, 143 N.M. 7, 172 P.3d 144; Barber's Super Mkts., Inc. v. City of Grants, 1969-NMSC-115, 80 N.M. 533, 458 P.2d 785.
Effect of partially invalid statute. — Before a partially invalid statute can be held to still be in force it must satisfy three tests: first, the invalid portion must be able to be separated from the other portions without impairing their effect; second, the legislative purpose expressed in the valid portion of the act must be able to be given effect without the invalid portion; and, thirdly, it cannot be said, on a consideration of the whole act, that the legislature would not have passed the valid part if it had known that the objectionable part was invalid. State v. Spearman, 1972-NMCA-150, 84 N.M. 366, 503 P.2d 649.
Interdependence of both valid and invalid provisions is controlling factor. — The invalidity of a portion of a legislative enactment does not operate to invalidate those portions of the act which are free from objection unless there is such interdependence of all provisions so as to make it reasonably certain that absent the part determined to be invalid, the legislature would not have enacted the valid portion. Clovis Nat'l Bank v. Callaway, 1961-NMSC-129, 69 N.M. 119, 364 P.2d 748.
Where saving clause used valid portion given effect, if possible. — Where a section has been incorporated expressly stating the legislative intent that the valid portion of the enactment should stand even though other parts may be determined to be invalid, there can be no question of legislative intent and if possible the portion of the legislation free from objection should be given effect. Clovis Nat'l Bank v. Callaway, 1961-NMSC-129, 69 N.M. 119, 364 P.2d 748.