California Governor Recall

I was surprised that the recall got the needed signatures. It is a big task to get that many. But it is obvious that the disdain for Gov. Davis is that deep and wide.

The question now remains whether the various legal challenges to the recall will succeed.

One type of challenge is based on "equal protection due process" grounds. The arguement goes that the rushed nature of the election means the county level administration of the election will be flawed thus disenfrancishing some voters.

Another challenge I saw in an LA Times Op-Ed from Hastings Law professor Grodin which I excerpt below:

-------------------------

Article X, Section 9 of the state Constitution tells us that the lieutenant governor "shall become Governor when a vacancy occurs in the office of Governor." That is what the lieutenant governor is elected to do. To say that the lieutenant governor steps into the governor's seat if the governor dies, or resigns, or becomes disabled, or is impeached, but not when he is otherwise removed from office, would be anomalous.

These are formidable arguments, and they are pending before the California Supreme Court in two petitions, one filed by James and Louise Frankel, the other by Andrew C. Byrnes and Barry Keene, the latter a former state legislator who wrote the disputed language in a 1974 constitutional amendment. The court has ordered the secretary of state to respond to both petitions this week, with possible oral arguments to follow.


---------------------------

In the 2000 Presidential Elections, the Florida State Supreme Court routinely over-ruled the executive branch and lower state level courts. In the end, the US Supreme Court over-ruled Florida's Supreme Court.


It will be interesting to see how the California Supreme Court reacts to the cases before it. Will it take Grodin's viewpoint that the recall would be the populist equivalent of a Presidential impeachment? Or will it allow the election to go forth as currently configured with a two part ballot?