It occurred to me that the passage of Proposition 8 in California would set a pretty radical precedent.
Essentially, what proposition 8 does is recast an old law that was ruled unconstitutional by the CA courts as a constitutional amendment -- and, in theory, make it impossible for the courts to rule it unconstitutional.
If this proposition goes through then why would ANY future propositions ever be worded as anything other than a constitutional amendment? There's no downside to doing so since the only requirement is still a majority of votes cast -- and this way the people who got the proposition on the ballot knows that they can simply bypass the judicial branch.
Only a fool would ever word a proposition as a law -- they'd all be constitutional amendments.
In effect, this method would simply eliminate the judicial branch with regard to propositions. And, if I were bringing a challenge before the court, I'd make absolutely sure to point out that okaying prop 8 would be tantamount to writing their branch of government out of existence.
1 comment:
I think the answer is that they already do whenever folks feel they can get away with it politically. It doesn't make much difference because the constitution prohibits the legislature from 'repealing' or even 'amending' any law passed by ballot measure. So any ballot measure should be safe from the legislature. I've actually litigated a case on this issue (re medical marijuana).
Post a Comment