Update on PLF's lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of AB 21
Author: Joshua Thompson
Last October Pacific Legal Foundation filed a writ of mandate directly in the court appeal challenging the constitutionality of Assembly Bill 21 (AB 21). AB 21 requires the state to grant race and sex based preferences for a number of different public building contracts. What makes this case so remarkable is that AB 21 reauthorized a number of statutes that had previously been rendered unconstitutional under Proposition 209. Indeed, two court orders and an executive order from the governor had required the state to discontinue the discriminatory statutes. Nevertheless, the legislature went ahead and reauthorized those very provisions.
While the court of appeal rejected that original writ petition, PLF refiled the case in the Sacramento Superior Court. The hearing date for the writ petition in the trial court is now a month away. PLF attorneys are representing American Civil Rights Foundation and Ward Connerly. Mr. Connerly was the successful petitioner in Connerly v. State Personnel Bd., one of the cases which had declared the statutes unconstitutional. As the hearing date approaches, I will keep you apprised of any developments.
What to read next
Don’t know how to identify every one of the 1,500 endangered species? This group wants to throw you in prison.
Ok, that’s a slight overstatement. But not as much of one as you would think. Activist group WildEarth Guardians apparently dreams of a world in which people can be thrown … ›
PLF scored another victory against bureaucratic overreach yesterday, when the federal court in Alaska dismissed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Congressional Review Act. This dismissal is PLF’s latest success … ›