Edmund G. Brown, Jr., as Governor v. the Superior Court of Sacramento County…

Summary

The court held that proponents may make substantial amendments to an initiative during the statutory review period so long as the amendments are reasonably germane to the original measure’s theme, purpose, or subject. Applying that lenient standard, it concluded that the amended initiative’s juvenile-transfer and parole provisions remained sufficiently related to the original proposal and ordered the trial court to vacate its contrary writ judgment. Chin, J., dissenting, would have upheld the trial court because the substituted constitutional parole provisions were materially different and had not received meaningful public review.