Court Rules Against Newsom's Mail-In-Ballot Executive Order

CALIFORNIA — A State Superior Court judge ruled Monday that Gov. Gavin Newsom's executive order to enact changes to the general election to mitigate the spread of coronavirus was unconstitutional. In a tentative decision, Judge Sarah Heckman also moved to prohibit Newsom from issuing directives that "amend, alter, or change" California laws.

California Assemblymembers James Gallagher (R-Yuba City) and Kevin Kiley (R-Rocklin) challenged Newsom's executive order in court on Oct. 21 at the Sutter County Superior Court in Yuba City.

Heckman issued a permanent injunction Monday, preventing Newsom from issuing any more executive orders. The ruling however, does not affect the Governor's stay at home orders, as State Senator Melissa Mendez tweeted Monday.

"To clear any confusion, the ruling in the case against Newsom does not end the lockdown," Melendez tweeted Monday. "It means he cannot amend, alter, or change existing statutory law or make new statutory law or legislative policy."

The executive order, No. N-67-20, enacted a new law that required counties to send all registered and active voters in California a vote-by-mail ballot. Another order also thinned the amount of vote centers throughout the state, requiring just one polling place per 10,000 residents from Oct. 31 to Nov. 2 for 8 hours and on Election Day from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.

Newsom enacted safeguards to the General Election through the California Emergency Services Act, which gives the governor authority to take sweeping action during a crisis.

The act allows Newsom to suspend state regulations and orders, but the judge ruled that Newsom's order to create a new law was unconstitutional, as only the legislature has that authority.

"The Governor had two Executive Orders. The first one was about mailing ballots to all voters. The second (the one we challenged in Court) was more broadly about the election process. More importantly, this lawsuit is about separation of powers," Gallagher tweeted Monday.

The ruling won't affect the General Election Tuesday, but as the likelihood for a Special Election amounts, possibly for 2021, the judge sought to prevent Newsom from enacting anymore changes to an upcoming election.

"The evidence persuades the Court it is reasonably probable the Governor will continue issuing executive orders which amend statutory law and create legislative policy," the Monday suit said.

The ruing is "tentative" which means both sides will have an opportunity to respond. Newsom has not yet state publicly whether he will attempt to appeal the decision.

"The Judge has ruled in our case against Gavin Newsom," Kiley tweeted Monday. "We won. The Judge found good cause to issue a permanent injunction restraining the Governor from issuing further unconstitutional orders."

*Correction: An earlier version of this article suggested that Judge Sarah Heckman moved to prohibit Gov. Gavin Newsom from issuing anymore executive orders. Heckman moved to prohibit Newsom from issuing directives that "amend, alter, or change" California laws.

This article originally appeared on the Across California Patch