 |
please contact the Webmaster
Support the Badge
Return to Home Page
|
|||
| Home | Articles | Book Page | Links | Mike's Corner | Search | Studies | Contact Us | |||
| IV. Constitutional Infirmity of the Initiative. | |||
| The "Three Strikes and Child Protection Act of 2004" suffers from a fatal constitutional flaw - it violates the single-subject rule of the California Constitution. | |||
| The single-subject rule of Article II, section 8(d) of the California Constitution provides that "[a]n initiative measure embracing more than one subject may not be submitted to the electors or have any effect." An initiative measure that violates the single-subject rule may be stricken from the ballot on order of the courts. Senate of the State of California v. Jones (1999) 21 Cal4th 1142. And an initiative measure that violates the single subject rule may be declared null and void even after it has been passed by the electorate. | |||
| This initiative violates the single-subject rule. The overwhelming purpose of the initiative is to reduce the punishments and scope of "Three Strikes." However, one section of the initiative has absolutely nothing to do with the "Three Strikes" laws. Section 4 of the initiative increases the punishments for sexual assaults on children. This section has no connection with "Three Strikes," and its change in the law (increasing punishments for sexual assaults on children) runs directly contrary to the thrust of rest of the -initiative, which is to decrease punishments in large numbers of felony cases. | |||
| The reason for the inclusion of Section 4 in the initiative is transparently clear - it allows the initiative proponents to claim that the initiative is a "Child Protection Act," and thereby increases its appeal to potential signatories on the initiative petitions and to voters at the general election. Section 4 finds its place in this initiative only as a mask to hide the true intent and effect of this initiative measure - to reduce punishments under "Three Strikes." Section 4 is "window dressing" that has no connection to anything else in the initiative measure. | |||
| Consequently, this initiative is constitutionally infirm as violating the single subject rule of the California Constitution. An action challenging its constitutionality should be filed in the courts of this state as soon as the Secretary of State announces that it has qualified for the general election of 2004. | |||
| Next Page | |||
| If you have any problems with this site please contact the Webmaster |
|||
Support the Badge Return to Home Page |