California Supreme Court appears split on blocking tax initiative
California Supreme Court justices sounded split Wednesday over top Democrats’ plea to nix a ballot measure amendment that would make it harder to pass new taxes before it goes to voters in November.
The ballot measure would require voters to approve taxes passed by the Legislature and would raise the voter-approval threshold for some local taxes to two-thirds. Top Democratic lawmakers want the court to invalidate the measure, arguing it's unconstitutional.
An attorney for Gov. Gavin Newsom and other Democratic leaders argued during Wednesday's hearing that the court must move swiftly to prevent wide-ranging disruption if voters approve the measure. Judges signaled openness to waiting to make a decision until after the election, as urged by the ballot measure's supporters, but also pressed them on the potentially sweeping scope.
The clash before California’s highest court reflects the extraordinary stakes of a standoff that has drawn in the state’s most powerful elected officials and political players. Newsom and legislative leaders’ effort to block the measure has drawn support from labor unions, big-city mayors and local governments.
Thomas Hiltachk, who was arguing on behalf of the initiative’s proponents, warned the court against “making a political judgment it should not make.”
“Instead that judgment should be entrusted to voters,” Hiltachk said.
The ballot initiative, championed by the California Business Roundtable and funded largely by real estate interests, would also dictate that the Legislature must approve fees that the administration can currently impose and could invalidate some already-passed taxes unless they are re-approved under new rules.
The measure’s opponents warn it would undermine public services, create massive uncertainty for local budgets and prevent governments from responding nimbly to crises. Newsom and leading Democrats have also made a more sweeping argument: that the initiative would fundamentally and unlawfully change how California is governed by stripping elected officials of their authority to raise revenue.
“From the founding of the state, the Legislature has had the supreme power of taxation and this measure would revoke that power for the first time in the history of California,” attorney Margaret Prinzing told the high court.
Justices questioned if that balance of power is immutable, testing a core premise of Democrats’ case.
“What is the significance of the Legislature having this power as opposed to sharing this power with the electorate?” Justice Goodwin Liu said. “Why would that be such a major transformation?”
At the same time, justices questioned the measure's proponents on its wider impacts. Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero asked if it would undercut responses to emergencies like the Covid-19 pandemic. Liu noted the “vast” initiative could cover mundane local fees for senior centers and libraries.
“We’re talking about every decision, down to library fines,” Liu said.
Hiltachk countered that California’s constitution has always split power between the Legislature and the electorate.
“The people have the last word,” he said. “This tug-of-war over taxation has been going on for over 100 years.”
Wednesday’s hearing followed months of political maneuvering by Democrats, organized labor and local governments seeking to undercut the tax measure. Last year, lawmakers placed a constitutional amendment on the November ballot that would require the tax initiative to pass by a two-thirds vote.
That was widely viewed as an attempt to force the California Business Roundtable to negotiate a deal on its own proposal. But there has been little movement with the deadline to remove qualified measures about seven weeks away.
