BILL ANALYSIS Ó SB 213 Page 1 SENATE THIRD READING SB 213 (Galgiani) As Amended May 28, 2013 Majority vote SENATE VOTE :38-0 ELECTIONS 5-1 ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Ayes:|Fong, Bocanegra, Bonta, | | | | |Hall, Perea | | | | | | | | |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------| |Nays:|Donnelly | | | | | | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY : Repeals various requirements that an individual must be qualified to register to vote in order to circulate election petitions and nomination papers. Specifically, this bill : 1)Repeals a requirement that a person must be qualified to register to vote in order to circulate an initiative or referendum petition. Repeals a requirement that a person must be a voter in the city or qualified to register to vote in the city in order to circulate a city initiative or referendum petition. Repeals a requirement that a person must be a voter in the district or qualified to register to vote in the district in order to circulate a district initiative petition. 2)Repeals a requirement that a person must be a voter in the electoral jurisdiction of an officer sought to be recalled in order to circulate a recall petition for that officer. 3)Repeals a requirement that a person must be a voter in the district or political subdivision in which a candidate is to be voted on in order to circulate nomination papers for that candidate. 4)Repeals a requirement that a person must be a registered voter of the district or political subdivision in which a candidate is to be voted on in order to circulate an in-lieu-filing-fee petition for that candidate. Repeals a requirement that a person can circulate an in-lieu-filing-fee petition only in a SB 213 Page 2 county in which he or she resides. 5)Requires a person to be 18 years of age or older in order to circulate a state or local initiative, referendum, or recall petition, an in-lieu-filing-fee petition, or a nominating paper. 6)Makes corresponding and technical changes. FISCAL EFFECT : None. This bill is keyed non-fiscal by the Legislative Counsel. COMMENTS : According to the author, "Federal case law (Nader v. Brewer) holds that ballot petitions or candidate papers may be circulated by a person regardless of whether he or she resides in the state or jurisdiction where the petitions or papers must be circulated. California state law is not in accordance with this federal court decision. Last year, 19 California counties were sued because they enforced state laws preventing non-California residents from circulating papers or petitions. "The U.S. Supreme Court has struck down statutes that require petition circulators to be registered voters. ( Buckley v. American Constitutional Law Foundation, Inc. (1999) 525 U.S. 182.) Other federal courts have struck down statutes that require petition circulators to reside within the state or locality affected by a petition, especially where requiring circulators to submit to jurisdiction by agreement would achieve the same end and would be more narrowly tailored to further the state's interest in preventing fraud. (See, e.g., Nader v. Brewer (9th Cir. 2008) 531 F.3d 1028; Krislov v. Rednour (7th Cir. 2000) 226 F.3d 851; Lerman v. NYC Board of Elections (2d Cir. 2000) 232 F.3d 135; and Chandler v. Arvada (10th Cir. 2002) 292 F.3d 1236.)" In 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled in Nader v. Brewer (2008), 531 F.3d 1028, that it was unconstitutional for states to prevent non-residents from circulating petitions. In 2009, the United States Supreme Court declined to hear the case on appeal, so the Ninth Circuit opinion stands. In 2010, the Libertarian Party of Los Angeles filed a lawsuit SB 213 Page 3 against the Secretary of State (SOS) in federal court challenging provisions of the California Elections Code that require people who circulate nomination papers on behalf of a candidate to be voters in the district or political subdivision in which the candidate is to be voted on. The district court dismissed the complaint on the grounds that the Libertarian Party lacked standing to sue, but a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the district court erred in dismissing the case. The SOS filed a petition requesting that the case be reheard before the entire Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, but that petition was denied. Further proceedings in the case were delayed by the district court pending a potential appeal by the SOS to the United States Supreme Court. In the latter half of 2012, a number of California counties were sued in federal court because their county clerks were allegedly enforcing state laws that prevent non-Californians from circulating initiatives and/or nomination papers. Proceedings in that case, which are pending in district court, have been stayed pending the decision in the Libertarian Party case. In light of the court's ruling in Nader, this bill repeals residency requirements for individuals who circulate initiative, referendum, or recall petitions, in-lieu-filing-fee petitions, and nomination papers. Analysis Prepared by : Ethan Jones / E. & R. / (916) 319-2094 FN: 0001307