California Supreme Court Puts an End to Taxpayer Protection Act Ballot Measure

California Supreme Court Puts an End to Taxpayer Protection Act Ballot Measure

The California Supreme Court agreed with Governor Newsom and members of the Legislature by striking down the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act on constitutional grounds ruling that the anti-tax measure cannot go before voters in November. Sponsored by the business community and having obtained more than 1.3 million signatures for inclusion on the ballot, had the measure passed, it would have become far more challenging to raise taxes in California, including by requiring the Legislature to seek approval from two-thirds of the voters for any new or higher state tax. The proposed ballot measure also had a “look-back” to January 1, 2022, and would have cancelled any new tax measures passed after January 1, 2022, by less than a two-thirds margin, including the City of Los Angeles’ Measure ULA real estate transfer tax passed by just a simple majority of voters.

Governor Newsom and Democratic legislative leaders had filed a lawsuit to stop the measure, arguing that it amounts to an illegal attempt to revise the California Constitution and would impair essential government functions. In its unanimous decision, the California Supreme Court agreed, ordering Secretary of State to remove the measure from the November 5th ballot.

Following the California Supreme Court’s ruling, Rob Lapsley, President of the California Business Roundtable and one of the primary sponsors to the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act, issued the following statement in a press release:

“Today’s ruling is the greatest threat to democracy California has faced in recent memory. Governor Newsom has effectively erased the voice of 1.43 million voters who signed the petition to qualify the Taxpayer Protection Act for the November ballot. Most importantly, the governor has cynically terminated Californians’ rights to engage in direct democracy despite his many claims that he is a defender of individual rights and democracy. Evidently, the governor wants to protect democracy and individual rights in other states, but not for all Californians.

We are disappointed that the California Supreme Court has put politics ahead of the Constitution, disregarding long-standing precedent that they should not intervene in an election before voters decide qualified initiatives.

Direct democracy and our initiative process are now at risk with this decision, showing California is firmly a one-party state where the governor and Legislature can politically influence courts to block ballot measures that threaten their ability to increase spending and raise taxes. Using the courts to block voters’ voices is the latest effort from the Democrats’ super majority to remove any accountability measures that interfere with their agenda – a failed agenda that continues to drive up the cost of living with little accountability and few results.

This ruling sends a damning message to businesses in California and across the country that it is politically perilous to invest and grow jobs for the future.  In light of this ruling and the state's large budget deficit, a huge amount of tax increases are on the way that are sure to make California's cost of living even higher. We will continue to explore our legal options and fight for the people’s right to hold their government accountable through direct democracy.”

The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act was supported and endorsed by the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles. The Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles is a co-plaintiff along with the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association seeking to overturn the City of Los Angeles’ Measure ULA, which case is pending.