XPost: alt.california, alt.fraud, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
XPost: talk.politics.guns, sac.politics

California Supreme Court justices sounded split Wednesday over top
Democrats’ plea to nix a ballot measure amendment that would make it
harder to pass new taxes before it goes to voters in November.

The ballot measure would require voters to approve taxes passed by the Legislature and would raise the voter-approval threshold for some local
taxes to two-thirds. Top Democratic lawmakers want the court to invalidate
the measure, arguing it’s unconstitutional.

An attorney for Gov. Gavin Newsom and other Democratic leaders argued
during Wednesday’s hearing that the court must move swiftly to prevent wide-ranging disruption if voters approve the measure. Judges signaled
openness to waiting to make a decision until after the election, as urged
by the ballot measure’s supporters, but also pressed them on the
potentially sweeping scope.

The clash before California’s highest court reflects the extraordinary
stakes of a standoff that has drawn in the state’s most powerful elected officials and political players. Newsom and legislative leaders’ effort to block the measure has drawn support from labor unions, big-city mayors and local governments.

Thomas Hiltachk, who was arguing on behalf of the initiative’s proponents, warned the court against “making a political judgment it should not make.”

“Instead that judgment should be entrusted to voters,” Hiltachk said.

The ballot initiative, championed by the California Business Roundtable
and funded largely by real estate interests, would also dictate that the Legislature must approve fees that the administration can currently impose
and could invalidate some already-passed taxes unless they are re-approved under new rules.

The measure’s opponents warn it would undermine public services, create
massive uncertainty for local budgets and prevent governments from
responding nimbly to crises. Newsom and leading Democrats have also made a
more sweeping argument: that the initiative would fundamentally and
unlawfully change how California is governed by stripping elected
officials of their authority to raise revenue.

“From the founding of the state, the Legislature has had the supreme power
of taxation and this measure would revoke that power for the first time in
the history of California,” attorney Margaret Prinzing told the high
court.

Justices questioned if that balance of power is immutable, testing a core premise of Democrats’ case.

“What is the significance of the Legislature having this power as opposed
to sharing this power with the electorate?” Justice Goodwin Liu said. “Why would that be such a major transformation?”

At the same time, justices questioned the measure’s proponents on its
wider impacts. Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero asked if it would undercut responses to emergencies like the Covid-19 pandemic. Liu noted the “vast” initiative could cover mundane local fees for senior centers and
libraries.

“We’re talking about every decision, down to library fines,” Liu said.

Hiltachk countered that California’s constitution has always split power between the Legislature and the electorate.

“The people have the last word,” he said. “This tug-of-war over taxation
has been going on for over 100 years.”

Wednesday’s hearing followed months of political maneuvering by Democrats, organized labor and local governments seeking to undercut the tax measure.
Last year, lawmakers placed a constitutional amendment on the November
ballot that would require the tax initiative to pass by a two-thirds vote.

That was widely viewed as an attempt to force the California Business Roundtable to negotiate a deal on its own proposal. But there has been
little movement with the deadline to remove qualified measures about seven weeks away.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/08/california-court-tax-initiative- 00156834

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)