Filter By:
Sort By:

Tag: initiative process

June 26, 2013

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

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 ...

January 03, 2013

CEQA versus the Constitution – round two

We have previously reported on the Tuolumne Jobs case, an important appellate decision expanding CEQA and diminishing California voters' constitutional right of initiative.  The Tuolumne Jobs decision broke with precedent and held that a city counsel was required to prepare an environmental impact report under CEQA before it could adopt an ordinan ...

December 21, 2012

CEQA: More precious than the Constitution?

We previously reported on the decision from California's Fifth Appellate District in the case of Tuolumne Jobs, holding that CEQA applies to local voter initiatives under certain circumstances.  Earlier this month, the real parties in interest in the case, James Grinnell, Wal-Mart Stores, and the City of Sonora, filed petitions for review in the ...

February 16, 2011

Cal Supremes will hear Prop 8 standing case

Author:  Damien M. Schiff Today the California Supreme Court voted unanimously to accept the certified question from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals about whether the official sponsors of Proposition 8, a voter-approved initiative that effectively banned same-sex marriage, have the right to defend that measure's legal validity in ...