Author: California Constitution Center

Overview California Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye assumed office on August 25, 2010, and secured retention in the November 2010 general election. Her current term ends on January 1, 2023. When asked at the recent SCOCA Conference 2022 whether she intended to seek another term, the Chief Justice said “I’m still thinking about it.” We confirmed how long the Chief Justice has to consider that question: the deadline for a SCOCA justice to file for retention in the November 2022 election is August 15, 2022. Analysis California appellate justices serve 12-year terms.[1] Before their terms expire on the Monday after the...

Overview Our review of the California Supreme Court year in 2021 will focus on the court’s immediate future, and we see two possible viewpoints there. From one perspective the court is in harmony, with only incremental changes on the horizon. We still see no evidence on the current court of the partisan behavior that characterized voting patterns in its past, consensus continues to dominate, and there is no evidence of a Brown versus senior justices split. Yet from another perspective the court is primed for change, and that potential for change is our primary concern here. Analysis The court’s performance...

Overview In this article the California Constitution Center evaluates Justice Leondra R. Kruger’s record on the California Supreme Court. We searched for evidence of partisan behavior, and focused on defining her alignment and orientation. We conclude that Justice Kruger is the median justice on a court that is closely aligned within a narrow band on the spectrum of possible orientations. We see no evidence of partisan ideology or voting behavior by Justice Kruger, who instead proceeds from a neutral approach that produces equivalent proportions of relatively liberal and conservative results. And we maintain our view that the current California Supreme...

Together with recall expert Joshua Spivak and other colleagues, the California Constitution Center presented the attached analysis of the various pending recall reform proposals to the joint California legislative committee hearing on October 28, 2021.

Overview Religious exemptions to mandatory vaccination programs may spark a revolution in religion jurisprudence. Existing U.S. Supreme Court religion doctrine should disfavor religious exemptions: under Employment Division v. Smith, a religious belief does not excuse compliance with neutral laws of general application.[1] And some state constitutions (like California’s) arguably bar giving religious individuals or organizations a benefit (like vaccination exemption) that is unavailable to others. But three factors may force an evolution here: federal law will not permit inquiry into sincerity; several high court justices seem ready to overturn Smith; and after Espinoza v. Montana state constitutions now arguably can’t...