The California Supreme Court will not prevent Democrats from moving forward Thursday with a plan to redraw congressional districts.

Republicans in the Golden State had asked the state’s high court to step in and temporarily block the redistricting efforts, arguing that Democrats — who are racing to put the plan on the ballot later this year — had skirted a rule requiring state lawmakers to wait at least 30 days before passing newly introduced legislation.

But in a ruling late Wednesday, the court declined to act, writing that the Republican state lawmakers who filed the suit had “failed to meet their burden of establishing a basis for relief at this time.”

  • kautau@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 days ago

    Bills can have only one subject. The subject needs to be the title. The title cannot be changed.

    And perhaps the title should be what the bill actually is

    For example something like “Freedom for American Internet Choice”

    Which likely removes regulation or restriction on a company being a monopoly because the “Freedom” is who can bribe the most and lobby against possible commercial or municipal competition.

    There’s plenty of bills like that where the title is incredibly misleading, on purpose, to get people who don’t care to do any research to wonder “why would anybody be against freedom?”

    • madcaesar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      45 minutes ago

      My favorite is “Freedom to Work Act”

      Oh that sounds ni… Oh it’s a bill to allow employers to fire you for any reason or no reason at all, and you have no recourse…

    • Hildegarde@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yes, that is what that line means. Washington has very similar language in their constitution and it blocks a lot of shenanigans.