Last August, I reported on the filing of a taxpayer challenge to California's Board Gender Quota Law.  Crest v. Padilla, Cal. Super. Ct. Case No. 19STCV27561.  California's Secretary of State, Alex Padilla, was named as the defendant in his official capacity.  The plaintiffs allege that the law (SB 826) violates Articles 7 and 31 of the California Constitution.  In October of last year, Secretary Padilla filed a demurrer to the suit, arguing that the plaintiffs lack standing and that the action is not ripe.

The Secretary of State's demurrer will be heard on Monday by Superior Court Maureen Duffy-Lewis.  Secretary Padilla faults the plaintiffs with failing to plead specific facts alleging illegal expenditures sufficient to establish taxpayer standing under Section 526a of the California Code of Civil Procedure.  The gist of the plaintiffs' opposition is that they have sufficiently alleged that they are California taxpayers, Secretary Padilla is a state officer, and Secretary Padilla is illegally spending taxpayer money.  Because this is at the demurrer stage, we are a long way from learning a final answer on the constitutionality of the law.