Attorney General Jerry Brown last week filed a court brief arguing that the California Supreme Court should not take up Schwarzenegger v. Chiang, one of seven furlough cases that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger hopes the high court will consolidate and consider.
(For a review of the furlough fight between the Republican governor and the six Democrats elected to office by statewide vote and the Board of Equalization, click here. A seventh official, Insurance Commissioner and GOP gubernatorial candidate Steve Poizner isn't part of Brown's filing to the high court.)
Democrat gubernatorial candidate Brown, who as attorney general is a constitutional officer, submitted a 23-page answer to Schwarzenegger's proposal that makes these arguments:
- A transfer would actually slow the appeals process instead of expediting it.
- The governor failed to meet the legal standard of seeking the high court's relief "promptly."
- The danger of conflicting rulings by the lower courts can be resolved without leapfrogging to the state Supreme Court.
- The constitutional officers' appeal involves unique legal questions that set it apart from the other six cases.
The constitutionals also oppose Schwarzenegger's alternative proposal that the Supreme Court consolidate the seven furlough cases in Sacramento's 3rd District Court of Appeal.
Click here to read Brown's brief.
The Author
About Comments
Reader comments on Sacbee.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Sacramento Bee. If you see an objectionable comment, click the "report abuse" button below it. We will delete comments containing inappropriate links, obscenities, hate speech, and personal attacks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. See more about comments here.