Quantcast

Judge rules against litigation challenging constitutionality of California recall election

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA RECORD

Sunday, November 24, 2024

Judge rules against litigation challenging constitutionality of California recall election

Hot Topics
Newsomfromgovwebsite1280x640

gov.ca.gov

A federal judge on Friday denied a legal challenge that sought to change or cancel the upcoming gubernatorial recall election, stating there is “no chance” the plaintiffs could prevail on the merits because their “federal constitutional rights simply are not violated.”

The court decision also questioned the timing of the lawsuit, which was filed against Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber a month before the Sept. 14 scheduled recall election date.

“In particular, the delay in filing this lawsuit means that Plaintiff seeks to halt an election that, in fact, has already begun, which is a strong indicator that equitable factors are not present here,” Judge Michael Fitzgerald of the California Central District Court wrote.

An ex parte application for a motion to intervene in the case was filed Wednesday on behalf of people who had already voted, Harmeet Dhillon, managing partner of the Dhillon Law Group, told the Northern California Record by email.

“The Plaintiff’s lawsuit was attempting to get the Court to prematurely end the recall election claiming that California’s Constitution on recall elections was somehow unconstitutional,” Dhillon said. “If the Court had granted the Plaintiff’s motion, these voters and millions of other California voters would have had their voices silenced.”

Dhillon noted the intervention was necessary to help ensure that the California constitution was defended in the case, R. J. Beaber, et al v. Shirley N. Weber.

“Our briefing included the case of Purcell v. Gonzalez, 549 U.S. 1 (2006) which stands for the proposition that lower federal courts should not alter the rules of an election on the eve of an election,” Dhillon said. “This was something the Court relied upon in denying plaintiff’s motion and allowing the recall to move forward.”

Stephen Yagman, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, also filed a notice of appeal on Friday. Yagman could not be reached for comment.

“The Court ruled today and denied the Plaintiff’s requested relief,” Eric Early, counsel to the intervenor defendant California Patriot Coalition – Recall Governor Gavin Newsom, told the Record by email. “The plaintiff has now filed a notice of appeal. We are confident that any appeal will be denied.”

More News