A law signed last week by Governor Gavin Newsom — Senate Bill 27, the Presidential Tax Transparency and Accountability Act — has spawned a host of lawsuits attacking it. Most of the challenges against the new legislation, which would bar presidential and gubernatorial candidates from the state’s primary ballot if they did not make public their tax returns from the last 5 years, are in federal court, but one was filed directly in the California Supreme Court. (Malcolm Maclachan reported about all of the lawsuits in today’s Daily Journal.) And the Supreme Court has quickly called for briefing in the matter.
The Supreme Court action — a writ petition in Patterson v. Padilla — was filed yesterday by the California Republican Party. Unlike the federal lawsuits, which make federal constitutional arguments, the Patterson petition claims SB 27 violates article II, section 5(c), of the state constitution.
The writ petition asks for relief no later than November 4 and the Supreme Court is moving quickly. The court today requested a preliminary opposition from California Secretary of State Alex Padilla. The opposition is to be filed by noon next Wednesday and a reply is due two days later. The court said, “Due to the time-sensitive nature of this matter, requests for extension will not be granted.”
It’s likely that, soon after the preliminary briefing is done, the court will decide whether it will hear the case on its merits. If it will reach the merits, expect an expedited briefing, hearing, and decision schedule. Election matters have a way of getting the Supreme Court’s immediate attention. (See, e.g., the court’s handling of a redistricting writ petition in 2012.)