NEW: Judge rejects request to block California recall or let @GavinNewsom be candidate on Q2:
“There is nothing unconstitutional about placing in one ballot a vote for or against the recall of the Governor and then a vote for a replacement candidate,” Judge Fitzgerald writes
@GavinNewsom “Plaintiff plainly feels disgruntled that a replacement candidate with a small plurality might replace a sitting governor who” could beat that candidate in regular election, Judge wrote. That's not enough to “ halt the mammoth undertaking of this gubernatorial recall election.
@GavinNewsom A blow here to UC Berkeley's Erwin Chemerinsky, who opined in @nytimes that California recall structure is unconstitutional and begged someone to sue
fwiw, Judge Fitzgerald was appointed by then-President Barack Obama
.@CASOSvote weighs in: "We accept the judge's ruling and agree it's the proper outcome. "
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
BREAKING: @GavinNewsom SIGNS #SB9 and #SB10 to allow duplex/lot splits on single-family lots and streamline up to 10 units
@GavinNewsom Neither bill is expected to make as big of a dent as #SB50 or other big-ticket, stalled #YIMBY pushes
But this still signals a major shift from single-family zoning, which dominates CA's housing landscape -- a dynamic Newsom and others fault for a severe housing crunch
Relatedly, reporters who thought we were off the clock a bit post-recall are remembering about those late-afternoon @GavinNewsom bill signings
This was all about #coronavirus. @GavinNewsom winter 2020 shutdown coincided with L'Affaire French Laundry and -- even more critically -- a judge gave pandemic-impeded proponents 4 more months to collect signatures. That was the window Newsom foes needed
Then Delta spike came. But rather than shy away from rules that fueled recall, @GavinNewsom embraced. His argument: would you rather be strict CA, or Covid-cliff-plunging Texas/Florida?
Last year's version of Pro Tem's duplexes bill, SB 1120, ignominiously died for lack of time after Asm passed it too late for Senate to take final vote.
THREAD: CA organized labor has been circulating framework for how they might organize gig workers. Here's why this matters in larger context of #AB5 and #Dynamex (1)
Recap: #Dynamex ruling says more workers are employees. Gig firms like Uber/Lyft are desperate to get out from under this, because their business models rely on work-when-you-want independent contractors. Labor not budging on #AB5 to put ruling in law; Newsom said he'll sign. (2)
BUT: #AB5 not a guarantee of gig worker organizing. Feds have said these workers are not employees, breaking with SCOCA. Newsom has said this gives CA an opportunity to create a new category; labor also talking about a new California Employee category (3)