Wilson v. Eu

Opinion

THE COURT.

In these mandate proceedings, we are called on to resolve the impasse created by the failure of the Legislature to pass legislative and congressional reapportionment bills acceptable to the Governor in time for the forthcoming 1992 Primary and General Elections. (See Cal. Const., art. XXI, § 1.)

On September 23, 1991, Governor Wilson exercised his authority to veto the legislative plans submitted to him. On that same day, an attempted override of the veto failed, and the Legislature adjourned for the remainder of the year. Because we lack assurance that reapportionment plans will be validly enacted in time for the 1992 elections, it is now incumbent on this

[473]

court to exercise its original jurisdiction and arrange for the drafting and adoption of appropriate reapportionment plans.

As we have repeatedly emphasized in past cases, “reapportionment is primarily a matter for the legislative branch of the government to resolve. [Citations.]”

(Legislature

v.

Reinecke

(1972) 6 Cal.3d 595, 598 [99 Cal.Rptr. 481, 492 P.2d 385] [hereafter

Reinecke

I].) Accordingly, we urge the Legislature and the Governor, in the exercise of their “shared legislative power”

(ibid.)

to enact reapportionment plans in time for the 1992 elections, and thus to render unnecessary the use of any plans this court may adopt. (See

ibid.;

see also

Legislature

v.

Reinecke

(1972) 7 Cal.3d 92, 93 [101 Cal.Rptr. 552, 496 P.2d 464]