Does the Legislature Enact Invalid Statutes?

Does the Legislature Enact Invalid Statutes? By Chris Micheli

            I would hope that your answer, unfortunately, would be “yes.” Whether good or bad, depending on your perspective, the California Legislature does indeed enact statutes that the judicial branch of government (state or federal) later determines to be invalid or unconstitutional.

            The most recent example is AB 51, a bill enacted four years ago, that was struck down by a federal district judge, and that ruling was upheld by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. As a result, AB 51’s ban on prohibiting mandatory arbitration agreements as a condition of employment was invalidated. The federal courts all found that AB 51 violates federal law.

            There are also several examples of state courts striking down enacted bills that attempted to amend the Political Reform Act, Prop. 103 (insurance rate regulation), and other voter-approved ballot measures. In HJTA v. Newsom, an attempt to overturn a ban on public financing of campaigns by statute was found to have violated Prop. 73.

            In Amwest, the appellate court ruled an exemption of surety companies from the scope of Proposition 103 did not further its purposes and was therefore invalid. In Foundation for Taxpayer & Consumer Rights v. Garamendi, the legislative amendment violated a primary mandate of Proposition 103 and thus did not further its purposes and was invalid. In the Garner decision, the appellate court ruled a legislative amendment of Proposition 36 that was inconsistent with the terms of the initiative was therefore invalid.

            There are other bases for successful legal challenges of enacted bills, such as “vagueness.” Some California courts have used descriptions of these unconstitutionally vague statutes with words such as “nearly unintelligible.”

            Other bases for striking down statutes enacted by the Legislature include violation of the federal or state Equal Protection Clause, “improper delegation of legislative authority,” and the single subject rule. There have also been successful judicial challenges on the grounds of violating state or federal constitutional protections such as freedom of speech, ex post facto, impairment of contracts, the supremacy clause, and due process.

            Those involved in the public policy arena, whether drafting legislation or advocating for or against bills, should keep in mind some of the bases for successful litigation challenges against enacted bills and try to avoid pursuing legislation that would face likely invalidation by state or federal courts.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Another Reason to Limit Bill Introductions?

Another Reason to Limit Bill Introductions?  By Chris Micheli             As I did my final review of Governor Newsom’s actions on the 1,046 bills sent to him after the 2023 Legislative Session, I noticed that some of the Governor’s veto messages provide additional rationales for limiting bill introductions.             Out of 156 vetoes from the 2023 Session, the number one reason for the Governor’s veto was budget concerns or cost pressures. In fact, 41% of the vetoes used that basis. That by itself is not a reason to limit bill introductions, but another statistic may provide such a reason…             By my count, just over 1/3 of the bills vetoed by Governor Newsom likely should not have been sent to his Desk and, arguably, should not have made it through the process at all. In fact, perhaps they should not h...
Read more

Frequently Asked Questions about California’s Budget Process

Frequently Asked Questions about California’s Budget Process  By Chris Micheli             What are the main parts of the California state budget? They are the Budget Bill, Budget Bill Junior, Trailer Bills, and Supplemental Reports.             What is the Budget Bill? This bill contains the appropriations and “Budget Bill Language”. Note that only a Budget Bill (or BBJ) can contain multiple appropriations. It requires a majority vote for passage and the bill takes effect immediately. There is just one Budget Bill. What is the “Budget Bill Jr.”? This is the bill that amends the main Budget Bill by making changes to multiple appropriations. There are often multiple BBJs. What is a Trailer Bill? This bill makes the statutory changes needed to implement the budget. It is the same as any other bill, but it takes effect immediately with a majority vote if it contain...
Read more

Can Any Bill Call an Election?

Can Any Bill Call an Election?  By Chris Micheli             In June 2024, we saw two bills that contain a provision to call an election.             Both bills contain a “plus” section at the end of the bill, which is an uncodified statute, stating the following: “this act calls an election within the meaning of Article IV of the California Constitution and shall go into immediate effect.” Such a measure only requires a majority vote, unless some other constitutional provision requires a higher vote threshold (e.g., a tax increase). What is the basis for this statement? Section 8(c)(3) of Article IV of the state Constitution provides: “ Statutes calling elections, statutes providing for tax levies or appropriations for the usual current expenses of the State, and urgency statutes shall go into effect immediately upon their enactment.” However, there is no further gui...
Read more