Framework Provided by the Court Whether Provisions of a Statute Can Be Severed
In State ex rel. Boyd v. Green, the Court provided the framework for whether provisions of a statute can be severed:
An unconstitutional portion of a general law may be deleted and the remainder allowed to stand if the unconstitutional provision can be logically separated from the remaining provisions, i.e., if the expressed legislative purpose can be accomplished independently of those provisions which are void, if the valid and invalid provisions are not inseparable, if the Legislature would have passed one without the other, and if an act complete in itself remains after the invalid provisions are stricken.
. . . the test remains whether the portion to be stricken is of such import that the remainder would not be complete or would cause results not contemplated by the Legislature. 355 So. 2d 789, 794-95 (1978).