Splitting up California: State Supreme Court takes initiative off ballot

[Common]

Wont let me post the article since Im not subscribed, so at least we know that it was shot down at this point


https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Splitting-up-Calif-State-Supreme-Court-takes-13085880.php

[DLLS]

Perhaps those state judges saw their jobs disappearing if the voters decided to split California. Oh that's right all judges are unbiased in their rulings. Yeah, right.

[barb012]

What would it cost to split up California?

[Green Arrow]

Probably for the best, I wasn’t a fan of the “Three Californias” proposal. I thought the “Six Californias” plan was much more representative.

[Chris]

So much for those old worn out claims that the government is the people for here the government has rejected the will of the people.

[Mechanic]

I am happy the idea has been denied. We are finally getting ahead of the debt and making progress on medical for everyone. The fools who signed the petition were southern California repukes.
I want the state to secede from the union so my money stays here instead of paying for some loser in Arkanass.

[DLLS]

So much for those old worn out claims that the government is the people for here the government has rejected the will of the people.

Perhaps some left leaning citizens of California will realize that legislating from the bench is never a good thing.

[DLLS]

What would three Californias have accomplished?

How would it have affected the number of left leaning people in the House of Representatives?

What about the Senate? Instead of two democrat Senators from California there would be six.

[jimmyz]

San Fran(sicko) and the rest of the Californian fruits and nuts can go to hell. I pay them and their state no mind.

[Green Arrow]

So much for those old worn out claims that the government is the people for here the government has rejected the will of the people.

Not really, no.

[Green Arrow]

What would three Californias have accomplished?

How would it have affected the number of left leaning people in the House of Representatives?

What about the Senate? Instead of two democrat Senators from California there would be six.

Actually, there would probably be 3-4. One whole section of the Three Californias would be solid GOP.

[Hal Jordan]

Actually, there would probably be 3-4. One whole section of the Three Californias would be solid GOP.Based on the borders they had drawn, I'd say one solid GOP, one strong GOP, and one solid Democrat.

Coming to you from the depths of inner space

[Mechanic]

Perhaps some left leaning citizens of California will realize that legislating from the bench is never a good thing.Sorry but as much as I do not like court decisions they are there to correct the wrongs of the conservative congress.

[DLLS]

I am happy the idea has been denied. We are finally getting ahead of the debt and making progress on medical for everyone. The fools who signed the petition were southern California repukes.
I want the state to secede from the union so my money stays here instead of paying for some loser in Arkanass.

Hey if you would rather pay for illegals than U.S. citizens in Arkansas knock yourself out.

[Mechanic]

San Fran(sicko) and the rest of the Californian fruits and nuts can go to hell. I pay them and their state no mind.We in California for the most part will be going to heaven as we do as the bible suggests. Unlike the sickos your a part of.

[Mechanic]

Hey if you would rather pay for illegals than U.S. citizens in Arkansas knock yourself out.The illegals give back to society far more than anyone from akakzaass. I also make enough to pay for several and it does not bother me.

[jimmyz]

We in California for the most part will be going to heaven as we do as the bible suggests. Unlike the sickos your a part of.

A Leftist usually has no belief in the Bible much less "heaven". Leftist Progressive activism is their religion.

[DLLS]

We in California for the most part will be going to heaven as we do as the bible suggests. Unlike the sickos your a part of.

Well the bible does more than suggest that a man who lies with another man as he does with a woman is an abomination. Now tell us again how people in California do what the Bible suggests.

[stjames1_53]

I am happy the idea has been denied. We are finally getting ahead of the debt and making progress on medical for everyone. The fools who signed the petition were southern California repukes.
I want the state to secede from the union so my money stays here instead of paying for some loser in Arkanass.
How's that high speed rail system working out? How's that single payer system working?
You guys have so much debt, you'll never see the light of day.
How 'bout those taxes y'all are paying. Given the current climate, it won't be long before you'll be taxed at 50%
And what about those fleeing CA because of the high taxes?

[stjames1_53]

The illegals give back to society far more than anyone from akakzaass. I also make enough to pay for several and it does not bother me.

more absurd claims that do not require on shred of proof............
You own illegals now?

[stjames1_53]

We in California for the most part will be going to heaven as we do as the bible suggests. Unlike the sickos your a part of.

you don't believe in the Good Book, and have probably never read it. Such a claim...how are you going to Heaven?
and that's you're, not your your

[stjames1_53]

Sorry but as much as I do not like court decisions they are there to correct the wrongs of the conservative congress.

and 85% of them have been shot down........buy a real court

[DLLS]

The illegals give back to society far more than anyone from akakzaass. I also make enough to pay for several and it does not bother me.

Have you invited them into your home to live rent free?

What exactly do they give back? Have you ever went to an Immigration Court and asked the staff how many requests they have for copies of hearing tapes related to those facing prosecution for felony reentry after removal?

Have you ever went to an Immigration Court and asked to see a random sampling of Records of Proceedings (public records) and looked at the charging documents to see how many of these fine upstanding illegals have committed rape and murder?

Have you ever sat in Immigration Court proceedings and heard an Immigration Judge read the charges against someone accused of sexually molesting his own nieces and granddaughters?

Oh but you've been told those are a minority right? Well do a little investigating instead of just listening to liberal talking points.

I will leave you with this. A lady would call an immigration court about once a week to find out whether her husband was still being detained, a husband who was a Tunisian citizen and had a warrant for his arrest in Tunisia. A husband who beat the crap out of this lady and poured hot sauce into her vagina.

Then there is the one where a kid just got out of the California youth authority and was facing removal. The Judge ordered him released on bond. The attorney for the then I&NS objected and the case was continued. The I&NS submitted a brief. You know what that sweet, darling kid did? He and a group of four of his friends took a 14-year old girl out to a field where they raped her, sodomized her and after sodomizing her forced her to perform oral sex on them.

Yes, these are the type of people you have money enough to support. Go ahead if you like them so much invite them to live in your home.

[jimmyz]

"... I also make enough to pay for several and it does not bother me"

Many Progs make this statement knowing full well that they have no intention of spending one dime to help a SJW cause nor the poor in the street.

[Abby08]

I am happy the idea has been denied. We are finally getting ahead of the debt and making progress on medical for everyone. The fools who signed the petition were southern California repukes.
I want the state to secede from the union so my money stays here instead of paying for some loser in Arkanass.

I want California to secede, too, it'll drive illegals from other states, to the new, MexiGuataSal, for free room and board, then, when every moral, decent, normal citizen has left and, there's no one's money to steal, California will fade into oblivion...and, don't try leaving, because, you'll be an illegal alien and, won't be granted access.

Sounds great, doesn't it?

[Abby08]

The illegals give back to society far more than anyone from akakzaass. I also make enough to pay for several and it does not bother me.

That's true..... tuberculosis, measles, illiteracy, no job skills, anchor babies, their entire illiterate families, their refusal to assimilate. Yeah, they sure do bring a lot to this country.

[Chris]

Perhaps some left leaning citizens of California will realize that legislating from the bench is never a good thing.

There's always hope.


What I read at the OP link is the court normally reviews referendums after they pass. Here they even pre-empted a vote by the people. Afraid to find out the result I'd bet.

[AZ Jim]

I want California to secede, too, it'll drive illegals from other states, to the new, MexiGuataSal, for free room and board, then, when every moral, decent, normal citizen has left and, there's no one's money to steal, California will fade into oblivion...and, don't try leaving, because, you'll be an illegal alien and, won't be granted access.

Sounds great, doesn't it?Ignorance, your strong point.

[Chris]

I want California to secede, too, it'll drive illegals from other states, to the new, MexiGuataSal, for free room and board, then, when every moral, decent, normal citizen has left and, there's no one's money to steal, California will fade into oblivion...and, don't try leaving, because, you'll be an illegal alien and, won't be granted access.

Sounds great, doesn't it?



Texas too!!

[Green Arrow]

There's always hope.


What I read at the OP link is the court normally reviews referendums after they pass. Here they even pre-empted a vote by the people. Afraid to find out the result I'd bet.

Again...not so much, no. They haven’t said no to a vote, they’ve just temporarily removed it for 2018 until it could be properly analysed. They’ve ordered legal arguments to be presented. It could still be on the ballot in 2020.

All of that was in the OP article.

[Chris]

Again...not so much, no. They haven’t said no to a vote, they’ve just temporarily removed it for 2018 until it could be properly analysed. They’ve ordered legal arguments to be presented. It could still be on the ballot in 2020.

All of that was in the OP article.


Why not wait, like they normally do until after the referendum is voted in? Seems to me they fear the results.

[Captdon]

They can't do it no matter what the people want. The Republicans aren't about to go along with it.

[Common]

Probably for the best, I wasn’t a fan of the “Three Californias” proposal. I thought the “Six Californias” plan was much more representative.
ITS ALIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! is it really you GA :)

[Common]

Probably for the best, I wasn’t a fan of the “Three Californias” proposal. I thought the “Six Californias” plan was much more representative.

If CA is allowed to split we could wind up with 100 states what a nightmare that would be

[DLLS]

If adjoining parts of Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas seceded the resulting state could be called Kotex.

[Green Arrow]

Why not wait, like they normally do until after the referendum is voted in? Seems to me they fear the results.

That would be conjecture. They saw a reason to re-examine the issue and tabled it for now until the legal arguments for and against could be heard.

[Green Arrow]

ITS ALIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! is it really you GA :)

The one and only :)

[Chris]

That would be conjecture. They saw a reason to re-examine the issue and tabled it for now until the legal arguments for and against could be heard.

Read the OP link. It is not conjecture.

[Green Arrow]

If CA is allowed to split we could wind up with 100 states what a nightmare that would be
Would it really, though? As it stands now the average American rarely notices changing city lines, county lines, or even state lines to any substantive, life-impacting degree. In the state-splitting scenario we would have more states, BUT those states would overall be more representative of their population.

[Green Arrow]

Read the OP link. It is not conjecture.

I did read the OP link, I quoted multiple items from it. It does not say they made this decision out of fear of the results and gives perfectly rational reasons for the decision. So claiming they did it for fear of the results is conjecture.

[Chris]

I did read the OP link, I quoted multiple items from it. It does not say they made this decision out of fear of the results and gives perfectly rational reasons for the decision. So claiming they did it for fear of the results is conjecture.

My claim is they made this decision before it was voted on rather than as they always have wait till after it has been voted on. Go read the link again.

Yes, I infer from that that they fear waiting.

Apparently, you infer something else. So what.

[Green Arrow]

My claim is they made this decision before it was voted on rather than as they always have wait till after it has been voted on. Go read the link again.

Yes, I infer from that that they fear waiting.

Apparently, you infer something else. So what.
This is not like other ballot initiatives. It may or may not be a legal exercise of the California electorate’s ballot initiative power. If it’s not an appropriate use of California’s voter initiative process, then they can’t just wait until the vote happens, it would be an illegal and illegitimate vote. So they’ll evaluate the issue, and if it is an appropriate use of the ballot initiative process it will go forward.

[Chris]

This is not like other ballot initiatives. It may or may not be a legal exercise of the California electorate’s ballot initiative power. If it’s not an appropriate use of California’s voter initiative process, then they can’t just wait until the vote happens, it would be an illegal and illegitimate vote. So they’ll evaluate the issue, and if it is an appropriate use of the ballot initiative process it will go forward.

I understand all that. The point still remains, the court always decided constitutional appropriateness after the vote. They have decided this time before the vote. All thse facts are not in question or speculative. My inference is draw from that factual change.

[Green Arrow]

I understand all that. The point still remains, the court always decided constitutional appropriateness after the vote. They have decided this time before the vote. All thse facts are not in question or speculative. My inference is draw from that factual change.

Well, I disagree with your conclusion. I think it is contrary to the stated reasons for the decision.

[Common]

Would it really, though? As it stands now the average American rarely notices changing city lines, county lines, or even state lines to any substantive, life-impacting degree. In the state-splitting scenario we would have more states, BUT those states would overall be more representative of their population.

The duplication and triplification of services would cost a FORTUNE, 100 state govt with govt employees, more cities with more employees, Police, Fire, garbage pickup, etc

[Lummy]

We in California for the most part will be going to heaven as we do as the bible suggests. Unlike the sickos your a part of.

You find Biblical justification for splitting up California? How so?

[Chris]

Well, I disagree with your conclusion. I think it is contrary to the stated reasons for the decision.

Yea, if you could just pu some meat on those bone. From speculation to disagree you're rather vague.

The OP link talked about why they're fearful because it threatens to break up the government they're a part of. It's not really even a constitutional question unless you can show where in the CA constitution it states the people cannot change the form of government.

[Chris]

The duplication and triplification of services would cost a FORTUNE, 100 state govt with govt employees, more cities with more employees, Police, Fire, garbage pickup, etc

Assuming each division would duplicate what the referendum is against.

[Chris]

California’s Supreme Court Won’t Let Citizens Vote for Statewide Divorce (https://reason.com/blog/2018/07/19/californias-supreme-court-wont-let-citiz)


California's Supreme Court has yanked from the November ballot an initiative asking Californians if they want to break the state into three parts.

It's rare for the state's Supreme Court to take initiatives off the ballot once they've been cleared by the California Secretary of State's office. Typically, the court waits until after an initiative actually passes to go through the trouble of assessing its constitutionality.

...Enthusiasm for breaking up California threatens the state's political power structure....

Yesterday afternoon, the California Supreme Court concurred unanimously. In a brief order they determined that the "potential harm in permitting the measure to remain on the ballot outweighs the potential harm in delaying the proposition to a future election." The court instructed California Secretary of State Alex Padilla to yank the initiative from the November ballot, for now at least....

[Green Arrow]

Yea, if you could just pu some meat on those bone. From speculation to disagree you're rather vague.

The OP link talked about why they're fearful because it threatens to break up the government they're a part of. It's not really even a constitutional question unless you can show where in the CA constitution it states the people cannot change the form of government.

I was very specific. I cited directly from the article. Don’t really feel like repeating myself.

[Chris]

I was very specific. I cited directly from the article. Don’t really feel like repeating myself.

You cited facts we both know. It's your arguments that are vague. You disagree is all you say.

[Green Arrow]

You cited facts we both know. It's your arguments that are vague. You disagree is all you say.

No, I said “I disagree because...” and then listed the facts in the article. But it’s fine, no skin off my bones. I’ve said what I needed to say.

[Chris]

Well, I disagree with your conclusion. I think it is contrary to the stated reasons for the decision.


No, I said “I disagree because...” and then listed the facts in the article. But it’s fine, no skin off my bones. I’ve said what I needed to say.


Check what you posted again, Green. Your disagreement was a vague as vague can be. It's really no skin off my bones.

[Captdon]

Would it really, though? As it stands now the average American rarely notices changing city lines, county lines, or even state lines to any substantive, life-impacting degree. In the state-splitting scenario we would have more states, BUT those states would overall be more representative of their population.

Your scenario fails since the Senate wouldn't go along with it.

[Green Arrow]

Your scenario fails since the Senate wouldn't go along with it.
Who cares?

[MisterVeritis]

The duplication and triplification of services would cost a FORTUNE, 100 state govt with govt employees, more cities with more employees, Police, Fire, garbage pickup, etc
This makes no sense whatsoever.

[Mechanic]

You find Biblical justification for splitting up California? How so?My reference to the bible was in regards to your everyday actions not what a state should do.

[Captdon]

Who cares?

The people of California do. I do since I don't want to give you liberals free seats.