Gonzalez-Estay v. Lamm

Once again the majority finds a popularly-initiated proposal for amending the state constitution unsuitable for consideration by the electorate, on the ground that it contains more than one subject. I have previously noted my concerns about what I consider to be our lack of consistency in applying the single-subject requirement and our unwillingness to confine our review to the particular dangers that requirement was designed to guard against.1 Although the majority opinion today pays homage to the requirement’s dual concerns for secreting unrelated provisions and combining provisions too…