Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. v. Padilla
California Supreme Court
1Concurrence
LIU, J.,
Concurring.—The question presented in this case is “whether the Legislature may pose to the electorate a single advisory question concerning the People’s support for a federal constitutional amendment.” (Maj. opn., ante, at p. 504.) The court answers yes to this narrow question and goes no further, “reserv[ing] for another day whether, in support of other powers not implicated here, an advisory ballot measure would be a permissible means of legislative investigation.” (Id. at p. 504, fn. 11.) With this limited holding, I concur.
*552The court’s reasoning in support of this result includes…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- M'culloch v. State of MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1819
- Barron Ex Rel. Tiernan v. Mayor of BaltimoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1833
- New York Trust Co. v. EisnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. CanningSupreme Court of the United States · 2014
- Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Comm'nSupreme Court of the United States · 2015
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.