Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Ass’n v. Padilla
Annotate this CaseIn 2014, the California Legislature sought to place on the general election ballot Proposition 49, a nonbinding advisory question that would have asked the electorate whether Congress should propose, and the Legislature ratify, a federal constitutional amendment overturning the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. Petitioners filed an original emergency petition for writ of mandate in the Supreme Court seeking to prevent the Secretary of State from proceeding with placement of Proposition 49 on the November 2014 ballot. The Supreme Court issued an order to show cause and stayed the Secretary from taking further actions in connection with Proposition 49 until after a final decision, effectively removing the advisory question from the November 2014 ballot. Despite this case being moot, the Court resolved the merits of Proposition 49’s constitutionality. The Court denied the instant petition for a writ of mandate, holding that Proposition 49 is reasonably related to the Legislature’s authority to use advisory questions to inform the Legislature’s exercise of its powers under U.S. Const., art. V, and therefore, Proposition 49 is constitutional.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.