Chief Justice says high court will be inundated with political cases next year

SACRAMENTO -- Chief Justice Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye expects the California Supreme Court to be "inundated" with political cases in 2020.

"2020 is an election year," Cantil-Sakauye said Thursday. "You may not realize that the court gets inundated with election challenges: based on fact, based on theory and based on emotional and inflammatory [reasons], in the form of challenges to ballot titles, in the form of people's representations of their credentials on the ballot to challenges to the constitutionality of an initiative being offered."

At a packed luncheon hosted by the Public Policy Institute of California, she spoke on bail, the death penalty and her decision to leave the Republican Party.

This came partly in response to questions about the court's unanimous decision in favor of California Republican Party Chair Jessica Millan Patterson in Patterson v. Padilla, S257302 (Cal. Sup. Ct., filed Aug. 6, 2019).

The ruling overturned a state law signed in July, SB 27, that demanded a presidential candidate release five years of tax returns in order to appear on California's primary ballot. That case got a lot of attention due to the subject matter, but Cantil-Sakauye said many people appeared to not realize how often the court is asked to weigh in on political issues.

The chief justice has found herself involved in some political controversy since the beginning of President Donald Trump's administration: first over her criticism of immigration law violator arrests at courthouses, and later over her 2018 decision to leave the Republican Party. On Thursday, she reiterated she made that choice after speaking to her two daughters about the nomination hearings of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

She also touched on another frequent topic: the state budget and the courts' "survival in the next recession." Cantil-Sakauye was sworn in near the height of the Great Recession in 2011.

That downturn led to the judicial branch losing nearly a third of its budget at one point. But in trips to the Capitol, she said she was shocked at how little some legislators and capitol staffers knew about the courts system. This helped inspire her to redouble her efforts around civics education.

She also noted the courts get dragged into budget-related topics against their will, particularly when it comes to fines and fees and bail.

"Note that fines and fees are all statutory," she said. "Because they are in statute, judges are required to assess them." This has particularly become an issue as the collection of fines and fees has dropped from a high of $2 billion to about $1.4 billion this year, potentially leaving a hole in the courts budget and many other places. Many people think all this money is going to the courts, she said, and don't realize much of it is going to "arcane causes" like the state's "submerged vessel recovery" program.

She added, "Courts are the face of collections. So sometimes courts get a bad rep because we are collecting these mandatory fines and fees. But we don't get them. We don't get the $2 billion. At least 70% of it goes to a number of worthy state and local programs."

Bail promises to be a huge issue, she added, noting the multiple pilot programs going on around the state in pretrial risk assessment. SB 10, a law phasing out cash bail in the state, is on hold pending a referendum. But a task force she convened concluded bail hurts poor communities without providing additional safety.

The courts and the Judicial Council, she said, are constantly looking for ways to improve.

"We self assess," Cantil-Sakauye said. "We ask ourselves how are we doing and respond when we're not doing well. That's colored everything that we do. That's why we look at fines and fees. That's why we look at bail. These issues have always been around. This is just fresh eyes on old issues."