A federal judge rejected a request to do away with or amend California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s recall or allow his name to be added to a second recall ballot question about who should replace the governor.
U.S. District Court Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald ruled the recall election process does not conflict with the “one person, one vote” clause in the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment.
The recall ballot asks two questions about whether Newsom, a Democrat, should be ousted, and who should replace him. If the majority votes on the first question to recall Newsom, then the individual who got the highest number of votes on the second question would then become governor.
“Plaintiff plainly feels disgruntled that a replacement candidate with a small plurality might replace a sitting governor who, based on a robust ‘No’ vote, might well have beaten that same replacement candidate in a general election,” Fitzgerald also wrote, adding that the plaintiffs’ rights were “not violated” and said that halting the election before the Sept. 14 deadline would be unfair to voters.
“As that may be,“ he wrote, ”such disgruntlement raises no federal constitutional issues and certainly does not give the federal judiciary the right to halt the mammoth undertaking of this gubernatorial recall election.”
In a statement last week, a spokesperson for California Secretary of State Shirley Weber said they agree and accept the judge’s ruling. The office said that it will not appeal the ruling and will continue to assist county officials with the recall election.
Lawyers for California Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office, who represented Weber’s office, filed arguments defending the recall law and opposing the plaintiffs’ lawsuit. Both Weber and Bonta were appointed by Newsom.
