California Court of Appeal

In petition for writ of mandate challenging a bill reordering the ballot propositions and the legislative practice of passing a budget with empty bills and identifying them by number (spot bills), but only after the budget was passed filling them with substantive content, petition is denied, where: 1) the constitutionality of this practice is one that is likely to recur yet evade review, and is of continuing public interest; 2) blank bills with an assigned number but no substance which remain empty of content at the time the budget is passed are not bills that can be identified within the meaning of article IV, section 12(e)(2) of the California Constitution and enacted as urgency legislation by a mere majority vote; but 3) petitioners' prayer for relief is narrowly tailored to ordering respondent Secretary of State to reorder the propositions on the November ballot, relief that can no longer be provided.

Appellate Information

• Decided 01/18/2013
• Published 01/18/2013

Judges

• RAYE

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel