Legal Opinion · Concurrence

C&C Constr., Inc. v. Sacramento Municipal Utility District

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 14, 2004No. C040761Published

1Concurrence

RAYE, J.,

Concurring.—For good or ill, in 1996 the electorate saw fit to amend the California Constitution to decree that “[t]he state shall not . . . grant preferential treatment ... on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in . . . public contracting.” (Cal. Const., art. I, § 31, subd. (a).) SMUD acknowledges that its preferential treatment policy runs afoul of this constitutional proscription unless it falls within an exception for “action which must be taken to establish or maintain eligibility for any federal program, where ineligibility would result in a loss of…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. PaulSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. English v. General Electric Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
  3. Alexander v. ChoateSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  4. City of Richmond v. J. A. Croson Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
  5. Crosby v. National Foreign Trade CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 2000

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API