Frequently Asked Questions about the Single Subject Rule in California

Frequently Asked Questions about the Single Subject Rule in California By Chris Micheli

            What is the purpose of the single subject rule for legislation? The general idea is to ensure that measures are not overly complex or that they may possibly confuse or “hide” provisions in a multi-faceted measure. Others have argued the single subject rule precludes combining popular and unpopular unrelated provisions in one omnibus measure.

            Does California have a single subject rule? There is a single subject rule for legislation that is considered by the Legislature in Article IV, Section 9, of the state Constitution, which provides, in part: “A statute shall embrace but one subject, which shall be expressed in its title. If a statute embraces a subject not expressed in its title, only the part not expressed is void.”

            When did California law reflect the single subject rule? It was in 1948 that the California Constitution was amended to add the single subject rule for initiatives. The following year, the California Supreme Court ruled that the single subject rule applicable to initiatives was to be construed in the same manner as Article IV, Section 9. The provision applicable to legislation had long been in effect by that time.

What did the Supreme Court initially say about the rule? It said that the single subject rule is generally “to be construed liberally to uphold proper legislation, all parts of which are reasonably germane.” The main case is Harbor v. Deukmejian (1987) 43 Cal.3d 1078, which was decided by the California Supreme Court. The Court explained that “the single subject clause has as its ‘primary and universally recognized purpose’ the prevention of log-rolling by the Legislature, i.e., combining several proposals in a single bill so that legislators, by combining their votes, obtain a majority for a measure which would not have been approved if divided into separate bills.”

Do other states have a single subject rule? Yes, almost every state constitution includes a single subject requirement. The California Supreme Court has also said, “The purpose of the requirement that the single subject of a bill shall be expressed in its title is to prevent misleading or inaccurate titles so that legislators and the public are afforded reasonable notice of the contents of a statute.”

What is the single subject rule for ballot measures? The California Constitution in Article II, Section 8(d) provides “An initiative measure embracing more than one subject may not be submitted to the electors or have any effect.”

            Is there more than one challenge to an initiative based upon the single subject limit? Yes, the language contained in Section 8(d) states that, if an initiative “embraces” more than one subject, it can neither be submitted to voters nor be enacted by the voters. This means there are two opportunities to challenge an initiative measure based upon the single subject rule: a pre-election challenge or a post-election challenge on this ground.

            How do the courts view challenges to initiatives? An initiative measure does not violate the single subject requirement if, “despite its varied collateral effects, all of its parts are reasonably germane to each other and to the general purpose or object of the initiative. The single subject rule does not require functional interrelationship or interdependence of provisions or showing that each one of the measure’s several provisions was capable of getting voter approval independently of other provisions.” Raven v. Deukmejian (1990) 52 Cal.3d 336

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