Which statement correctly reflects the presumptions when a statute is enacted?

• A. The heading limits the meaning of the statute.
• B. If part of a statute is unconstitutional, the rest automatically invalid.
• C. There is compliance with the U.S. and Texas Constitutions; the entire statute is intended to be effective; a just and reasonable result is intended; a result possible of execution is intended; and the public interest is favored over private interests.
• D. The Code Construction Act applies only to old statutes.

Answer: (C)

When a statute is enacted, it is interpreted with the assumption that it should fit within the Constitution, be workable in practice, and serve the public interest. The Code Construction Act lays out these presumptions to keep laws valid and effective unless there is a clear reason to conclude otherwise. The statement that best reflects these presumptions includes several key ideas: the statute is presumed to comply with both the U.S. and Texas Constitutions; it is presumed to be intended to be effective in operation; it is presumed to aim for a just and reasonable result; it is presumed to be capable of enforcement; and, in general, the public interest is favored over private interests. This combination preserves the Legislature’s intent while maintaining constitutional boundaries.

The other options don’t fit these established presumptions. A heading does not limit the true meaning of a statute. If part of a statute is unconstitutional, this does not automatically invalidates the entire act, because severability rules allow the valid portions to stand. And the Code Construction Act applies broadly to statutes, not just to old ones.