Articles

Hollingsworth v. Perry : Supreme Court rules citizens can't "stand" in the way of politicians who ignore the law

June 26, 2013 | By PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION

Regardless of readers’ specific views on Prop. 8, today the Court decided an important question about standing — and it got it wrong.  Hollingsworth v. Perry will have serious repercussions that extend far beyond the same-sex marriage debate.  Today’s decision could spell disaster for any group that successfully sponsors an init ...

Articles

PLF's Official Statement on Hollingsworth v. Perry, the Supreme Court's Prop. 8 case

June 26, 2013 | By PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION

Although Pacific Legal Foundation takes no position on the constitutionality of Proposition 8, PLF submitted an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court solely on the issue of standing.  PLF argues that sponsors of any successful California initiative have standing to defend the measure in court if elected officials decline to do so.  Today, the & ...

Articles

California Supreme Court lets voters be heard

February 14, 2013 | By TONY FRANCOIS

Yesterday the California Supreme Court granted review of Tuolumne Jobs & Small Business Alliance v. Superior Court (Wal-Mart Stores). This is an excellent development, which PLF has supported. Readers will recall that Tuolumne Jobs held that a city council has to complete an EIR under CEQA in order to adopt an ordinance that is presented ̷ ...

Articles

President's weekly report — February 1, 2013

February 01, 2013 | By ROB RIVETT

Individual Rights — Defending the right to petition our government. Hollingsworth v. Perry in the U.S. Supreme Court. We addressed the question whether sponsors of initiatives have standing to defend those initiatives in court — especially when a state’s attorney general refuses to defend the measure. PLF’s amicus brief, fil ...