With a simple
two-word notice reading "petition dismissed," the California Supreme
Court on August 26 rejected a lawsuit challenging the legality of Proposition
13.
Charles Young,
director of the Museum of Contemporary Art in Los Angeles and former chancellor
of the University of California at Los Angeles, filed a "petition for writ
of mandate/prohibition" in the California Supreme Court on July 10. He asked
the court to overturn Proposition 13, claiming that the initiative was not
simply a constitutional amendment (which can be done via the initiative
process), but was a constitutional revision (which can be accomplished only by
means of a constitutional convention).
Under Article VI,
Section 10 of the California Constitution, the California Supreme Court has
original jurisdiction in such matters.
The state Supreme
Court already decided this issue in Amador Valley Joint Union High School
District v. State Board of Equalization, 22 Cal. 3d. 208
(1978). In that case, the court ruled that Proposition 13 was not a
constitutional revision, but instead was an amendment lawfully enacted through
the initiative process. (Source: The
Sacramento Bee, August 27.)
Cal-TaxReports, August 31, 2009
© 2009 California Taxpayers'
Association.
All Rights Reserved.