Judgment expected in denied rally permit case
A Republican Congressional candidate has sued Gov. Gavin Newsom after she was denied permits to protest in Sacramento in April, 2020, during the pandemic.
Christine Bish, running to represent Sacramento in Congress, and Sacramento Gun Club instructor Ron Givens, claimed their First Amendment rights to free speech, freedom of assembly and right to petition, the due process clause of the 14th Amendment and the California Constitution’s right to liberty were violated.
Givens claimed a California Highway Patrol officer told him that no protest permits were to be issued under Newsom’s pandemic orders.
In a motion for summary judgment, the state said there are no triable issues of fact because of the compelling need to manage the pandemic.
A motion for summary judgment will be heard Aug. 9.
The plaintiffs are represented by Harmeet Dhillon, Mark Meuser, Gregory Michael of San Francisco’s Dhillon Law Group. Dhillon is the former vice chairwoman of the California Republican Party. She has sued California for switching to a mail-ballot election, and sued the state over its coronavirus orders more than a dozen times on constitutional grounds, Politico reported. She also petitioned the California Supreme Court to review California’s redistricting, a petition which the Supreme Court denied.
Read the complaint here.
CA housing-density law ruled constitutional
California’s SB 10, which allows cities to increase zoning density regardless of local initiatives, sustained a legal challenge led by the city of Redondo Beach and AIDS Healthcare Foundation.
Redondo Beach had zoning restrictions that the law superseded. AIDS Healthcare Foundation had funded some of the campaigns under those zoning restrictions.
The petitioners argued that the legislature cannot override the people’s initiative, and that local governments cannot override local voters’ initiatives to create ordinances.
Los Angeles Superior Judge James Chalfant agreed with the state’s argument that the California Legislature has the power to preempt local initiatives.
“There is a difference between horizontal and vertical limits on the power of voter initiatives. While the Legislature cannot invalidate state initiatives, and local governments generally cannot ignore local initiatives (horizontal limitations), the Legislature can (and does) preempt local initiatives (vertical),” Chalfant wrote.
Beverly Grossman Palmer represented the petitioners.
Seth Eden Goldstein represented the state.
Case number 21STCP03149.
Read the ruling here.
