U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit
Feb. 26, 2016
What is the harm in giving voters more choice?
Given the text and structure of the constitution, limiting the 'advisory measure' power is decision for the voters, not the court. By Michael B. Salerno
In Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association v. Padilla, 2016 DJDAR 24 (Jan. 4, 2016), the California Supreme Court reversed an order that had removed a measure placed on the ballot by the state Legislature asking the voters if an amendment to the federal Constitution should be pursued. When the case was reconsidered, by a 6-1 vote, the court decided the measure should not have been removed.
A disagreement arose betw...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In