• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

After a lawsuit was filed last week by several University of California students and social activists against the governor’s administration, various legislative members have begun to take sides.

The lawsuit, filed last Wednesday in part by the University of California Students Association, accused Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of acting unconstitutionally in regard to the budget.

The lawsuit was also filed on behalf of the Equal Justice Society and Californians for Justice. It claimed the governor had illegally reduced the vehicle license fee, which consequently created a hole in the budget.

To remedy this deficit, the administration implemented $148 million in “emergency” cuts, including extensive cuts to the UC. Such action was also claimed illegal by the plaintiffs because the governor had supposedly bypassed the Legislature’s jurisdiction.

Assemblyman Tom Harman, R-Huntington Beach, who supports the governor’s administration in the case, said Schwarzenegger had “rescinded the illegal $4 billion car tax that had been put in place by his predecessor, Gov. Davis,” and as a result, Schwarzenegger had been forced to use money from the state’s General Fund to pay back the cities and counties.

State Sen. Sheila Kuehl, D-Los Angeles, said the car tax instituted by Davis was based on a law originally signed by former Gov. Pete Wilson, thus making the actions of Schwarzenegger and not those of Davis, illegal.

Despite contrary opinions, legislators are not going to play any direct role in the lawsuit.

Because the Legislature originally created the laws that were allegedly broken by either Davis or Schwarzenegger, legislators themselves are unable to sign on to the suit.

“It’s not appropriate for the Legislature or any individual legislator to be involved with the lawsuit,” Kuehl said. “We passed the original law.”

Assemblymembers are finding other methods of joining the struggle. Some are encouraging their constituents and others they can influence to become directly involved.

State Sen. Tom Torlakson, D-Antioch, is encouraging cities and counties to support the lawsuit because the governor wants to take even more from cities and counties, said spokesman Robert Oakes.

Torlakson suggested proponents of the suit should file amicus curiae, or “friend of the court” briefs in support of the litigation.

“This creates a broader base and makes the argument stronger the more significant plaintiffs you have behind it,” Oakes said.

Thus far, no amicus curiae briefs have been filed because they may not be filed until the California Supreme Court grants the case petition for a writ of mandate. There is currently no date set before which the court must act.

Though supportive of the lawsuit, some Democratic legislators have their hands tied for now. The most they say they are able to do is gather public support for the case.

“It does help the public see the correctness of the student association’s actions,” Kuehl said.

Assemblyman Rick Keene, R-Chico, also said it was important that opinions are voiced to draw the involvement of the public. Keene also serves as the vice chair of the state Assembly’s Committee on Budget.

“Public discourse is very good,” Keene said. “We live in a participatory democracy; it is good that people discuss their opinions.”

Although some are skeptical as to whether the lawsuit will even be heard in the California Supreme Court, the plaintiffs of the lawsuit are hopeful.

“(Legislative members’) voicing their opinions doesn’t hurt by any stretch,” said Warrington Parker III, one of the lawyers representing the petitioners. “I don’t know that it will have any effect, but I think the lawsuit has strong legal merit.”