Overview In this article I address what I view as a significant breakdown in California’s constitutional order. I begin with an overview of separation of powers doctrine to explain the importance of the non-delegation doctrine — which prohibits the state legislature from giving away its lawmaking powers. I then explain California’s three tests for distinguishing between legitimate and illegitimate delegations of authority. And in all of this, I aim to address a controversy: that Governor Newsom’s exercise of “all police powers of the state” in formulating rules restricting individual liberties and shuttering businesses during 2020–21 violated separation of powers and...

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 The redistricting season happens once every ten years, and it is always characterized by two things: fierce partisan struggles for control of the maps that will determine political power in the next decade, and anguished complaints about how politicized the process is. The current redistricting cycle is no different, featuring the usual allegations of partisan gerrymandering and consequent legal challenges to proposed district maps across the country. This boring-but-important topic receives less news coverage than it merits, and consequently it is rarely a target for major reforms. For example, a recent Pew poll found that most Americans are unaware...

Overview In the past two years members of California’s Assembly twice tried to advance tax bills (AB 2088 and AB 310) that were designed to capture revenue from wealthy residents who fled the state to avoid the other income tax increases in those bills.[1] Both would have imposed a tax (levied annually for 10 years) on a California resident who leaves the state. This article argues that such an exit tax has grave legal defects that should prevent a state from imposing a wealth-based exit tax on its former residents. Analysis The two bills employed distinct approaches to capturing revenue...