From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Legislature v. Reinecke

Supreme Court of California
May 10, 1972
496 P.2d 464 (Cal. 1972)

Opinion

Docket Nos. Sac. 7917, 7919, 7923.

May 10, 1972.

COUNSEL

George H. Murphy, Legislative Counsel, for Petitioners in No. 7917.

No appearance for other Petitioners or Respondents.


MEMORANDUM CASE


OPINION

THE COURT.

In our opinion herein we stated: "We retain jurisdiction to draft new reapportionment plans for the elections of 1974 through 1980 in the event that the Legislature does not enact valid legislative and congressional reapportionment statutes by the close of its 1972 regular session." ( Legislature v. Reinecke (1972) 6 Cal.3d 595, 604 [ 99 Cal.Rptr. 481, 492 P.2d 385].) The Senate of the State of California now requests that we modify the condition upon which we will exercise our retained jurisdiction to state that we will not exercise such jurisdiction if the Legislature, in 1972, enacts valid legislative and congressional reapportionment statutes at a special session. The Senate bases its request on the belief that it will be impossible to reach agreement on reapportionment legislation until after the general election in November 1972, and on the fact that a postponement of adjournment of the 1972 regular session until after the November election would delay the effective date of many statutes of great importance to the people of the state. (See Cal. Const., art. IV, § 8, subd. (c).)

We deem the Senate's request reasonable and the reasons therefore persuasive. Accordingly, we will not exercise our retained jurisdiction herein if the Legislature, in 1972, enacts valid legislative and congressional reapportionment statutes either during its current regular session or at a special session called for that purpose.


Summaries of

Legislature v. Reinecke

Supreme Court of California
May 10, 1972
496 P.2d 464 (Cal. 1972)
Case details for

Legislature v. Reinecke

Case Details

Full title:LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA et al., Petitioners, v. ED…

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: May 10, 1972

Citations

496 P.2d 464 (Cal. 1972)
496 P.2d 464
101 Cal. Rptr. 552

Citing Cases

Wilson v. Eu

to enact reapportionment plans in time for the 1992 elections, and thus to render unnecessary the use of any…

Legislature v. Reinecke

In these cases we retained jurisdiction to draft new legislative and congressional reapportionment plans for…