CA Secretary Of State Legal Challenge To Female Director Quota Law

Final August, I reported on the submitting of a taxpayer problem to California’s Board Gender Quota Legislation. Crest v. Padilla, Cal. Tremendous. Ct. Case No. 19STCV27561. California’s Secretary of State, Alex Padilla, was named because the defendant in his official capability. The plaintiffs allege that the regulation (SB 826) violates Articles 7 and 31 of the California Structure. In October of final yr, Secretary Padilla filed a demurrer to the swimsuit, arguing that the plaintiffs lack standing and that the motion will not be ripe. Final week, Superior Courtroom Choose Maureen Duffy-Lewis overruled the Secretary of State’s demurrer:

“Plaintiffs carry swimsuit underneath statute, CCP 526a which permits for a swimsuit on the grounds of unlawful expenditure. To state a declare, plaintiffs should allege they’ve paid taxes inside a yr earlier than the submitting of the motion and that defendant is an officer or agent of the state and is expending taxpayer funds illegally. HERZBERG V COUNTY OF PLUMAS (2005) 133 CAL APP 4th 1, 23-4. The expending of officer’s time performing illegal or unauthorized acts is enough; it doesn’t matter if the expenditure is small or that the expenditure might allow an final saving of tax funds. BLAIR V PITCHESS (1971) 5 CAL 3D 258, 268.

Plaintiffs’ allegations are enough to fulfill the standards set above; that is all that’s required for standing.”

The Secretary of State, who’s represented by the Legal professional Common, will likely be required to reply the criticism and we might all ultimately get a solution to the query of the regulation’s constitutionality.

Judicial Watch, Inc., which filed the criticism, supplied the next touch upon Choose Duffy-Lewis’ choice: “We’re happy the Courtroom upheld California taxpayers’ proper to problem the unlawful expenditure of taxpayer funds. We sit up for proving the gender quota mandate violates the California Structure.”