Profile | Allan Bartlett
» Follow Me on Twitter
» My Facebook
Author's Latest Posts |
- AG Watch: Whither Three Strikes....The Saga Of LA DA Steve Cooley
- Clerk/Recorder Watch: Another Epic Tom Daly FAIL!
- 48th CD Watch: Campbell Votes To Get Out Of Afghanistan
- 47th CD Watch: Quang Pham Ends His Campaign
- AG Watch: Steve Cooley Wants To Weaken Three Strikes Law
More»
AD72 Special Election Watch: About That Residency Requirement....
By Allan Bartlett | 09/28/09 | 12:37 PM EDT | 16 Comments
I know I'm probably splitting hairs here and I'm definitely not an election law lawyer, but I read an interesting article this morning in the Los Angeles Times about State Senator Rod Wright. Apparently, the Los Angeles DA is investigating him for false statements he put down on his voter registration card. The reason this article caught my attention though is this little nugget half way through the article...
"Article 4, Section 2(c) of the state Constitution says that a person "is ineligible to be a member of the Legislature unless the person . . . has been a resident of the legislative district for one year . . . immediately preceding the election."
Again I'm not an election law attorney, but it seems pretty clear from that language in our State Constitution that one must live in the legislative district for one full year before you are eligible to run for office in that district. I'm wondering if Linda Ackerman's campaign staff realizes this yet? It seems to this blogger that she is ineligible to run for the 72nd AD because she currently lives in the 70th AD. BTW, she would meet the residency requirement to run for the 70th AD since she's lived in a "secret gated community" in Irvine for the past few years. I realize that it might be asking a lot for the State Constitution to be followed, but I'm funny like that. This race might be over before it actually begins.
Just for kicks, here's the entire Article 4 Section 2 language in our State Constitution...
(a) The Senate has a membership of 40 Senators elected for 4-year terms, 20 to begin every 2 years. No Senator may serve more than 2 terms. The Assembly has a membership of 80 members elected for 2-year terms. No member of the Assembly may serve more than 3 terms. Their terms shall commence on the first Monday in December next following their election.
(b) Election of members of the Assembly shall be on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of even-numbered years unless otherwise prescribed by the Legislature. Senators shall be elected at the same time and places as members of the Assembly.
(c) A person is ineligible to be a member of the Legislature unless the person is an elector and has been a resident of the legislative district for one year, and a citizen of the United States and a resident of California for 3 years, immediately preceding the election.
(d) When a vacancy occurs in the Legislature the Governor immediately shall call an election to fill the vacancy.
TAGS: Linda Ackerman, Chris Norby, 72nd AD
| 
|
16 Comments | Related Topics »Orange County (CA)
RECOMMENDED SITES
Comments
I can only imagine that if some liberal judge lets her run in violation of the state constitution, that if she takes the oath of office and pledges to support and defend the Constitution of the state of california...it will be done with her fingers crossed.
What constitutes residency? I can see a scenario where a judge may rule that owning property in the district or some other criteria besides actual voter registration would be valid residency. I'll defer to the lawyers on this subject.
...Carol Rudat's Orange Council race in 2006 should illustrate the difficulty of legally pressing a carpetbagging charge. In Rudat's case, a lawsuit was filed charging she didn't live in Orange when she registered to vote there, and asking Judge Gray to remove her from the ballot. It was clear from evidence such as water bills that she didn't live in the Orange house she had bought. Gray nearly kicked her off that ballot, but in the end relented while making it clear he thought she was faking residency. Judges are loathe to intervene in these sort of cases.
According to the Secretary of State's Candidate Qualifications and Requirements sheet: "Article IV, section 2(c), of the California Constitution requires one year residency in the legislative district and three years residency in California; however, it is the legal opinion of this office that these provisions violate the U.S. Constitution and are unenforceable." (This is footnote 2.)
The Secretary of State's office doesn't specify what part of the U.S. Constitution this violates, but I suspect it's the equal protection portion of the 14th Amendment.
This issue has been raised before in other races. But as Chris pointed out, it is considered non-enforceable. For example, in 1995, Assemblyman Ross Johnson re-registered from the Assembly District he didn't really live in (AD72) into a Senate District he didn't really live (SD35), and won the special election for Marian Bergeson's senate seat.
It's a good point to raise, nonetheless -- if for no other reason than it helps the folks at Fringe For Fullerton's Future furnish content for their blog. They'd be hard-pressed for AD72 content absent Red County.
Aren't we as conservatives supposed to champion the 10th amendment to the US Constitution? Clearly this is a state's rights issue that should not be surrendered due to some former California Secretary of State's opinion.. If California's constitution wishes to prohibit carpetbagging I for one say to hell with the feds!
"Aren't we as conservatives supposed to champion the 10th amendment to the US Constitution?" We are supposed to, but you know, the US Constitution has become so passe these days. I mean it's a living breathing document. Why should we interpret it so literally :)
The last time a state said to hell with the feds, the feds sent in the National Guard. There is a process for rectifying this. You have to sue the Secretary of State to force her to enforce the state Constitution.
If the Secretary of State's opinion has a solid legal foundation, you'll probably lose. If the Secretary of State's opinion is not supported by precedent, you might win or you might lose.
This obviously could not be decided until well after this election is decided, but there might be a way to get a ruling on the issue for the future.
Comparing this to Carol Rudat is not an accurate comparison because the city of Orange will have its own rules which may or may not require a duration of residency and even if it did, that duration was probably met. The question there was not when but if. The Ross Johnson example seems applicable though.
Its too bad that the 10th Amendment has no legally enforceable rights. It is nothing more more than a restatement on principles of federalism.
Seriously though... is carpetbagging really illegal? Or just wrong?
Show me a candidate who has been prosecuted for carpetbagging?
It's a question that is hashed out before the voters. As I've written in the past, voters tend to care less when it comes to legislative and congressional races. Just look at central OC.
In the case of Linda Ackerman, I'd agree that she is carpetbagging in the ordinary sense of the word. But I also think it is mitigated in her case because she is moving back into a community where she lived for most her life -- where she raised her children, and where her husband served on the city council, and he represented it in the state legislature.
I think that is qualitatively different than past instances like Tom Umberg moving into the 1st Supe District, where he had no residential ties whatsoever. Or Carol Rudat moving (allegedly, but not really) back to Orange after 25 years to run for city council. Or Ross Johnson in 1995, for that matter.
At the end of the day, it's a judgment call for the voters to make.
Chris and others are indeed correct. Here's my Total Buzz item on the issue: http://totalbuzz.freedomblogging.com/2009/09/28/few-residency-requirements-for-assembly-race/22531/
At the end of the day, what really matters to the people of the 72nd assembly district is REPRESENTATION.
It is without aurguement that someone who does'nt live there can not effectively represent those whose issues are in that geographic area.
Would a resident of Villa Park be comfortable with a resident of Berkeley or Venice representing them if that person was born there?
You can not mitigate this.
If they voted this person into office.
...you'll be just as adamant that Rep. Loretta Sanchez either move out of Palos Verdes Estates and into her district, or to quit Congress.
If you're going to be consistent, that is.
If she in fact lives there, YOU ARE 100% correct. She should move or resign.
It should be noted that I see her often in Floral Park in Santa Ana,
But, I am sure she is just driving around for "cover".
Post new comment