The LA Times offers Cries for reform of California government come from all sides, mentioning a constitutional convention and other possible fixes.
But could the judiciary be cajoled to fix California’s budget problems through an election law challenge? See this article in today’s Los Angeles Daily Journal on a new lawsuit seeking to invalidate a provision of the California Constitution passed in 1933 requiring a 2/3 vote on the budget. The lawsuit, filed as an original writ petition in the California Supreme Court (Young v. Schmidt, petition too large a file to upload (UPDATE: Petition and related documents are here)), contends the measure is an unconstitutional initiated revision of the state’s constitution under the state Supreme Court’s opinion in Strauss v. Horton (the recent Prop. 8 case). My first question is whether this suit is barred by the doctrine of laches. If not, this could get very interesting.