conc. & dis. opn. of Mosk, J.
How later courts described this case
- conc. & dis. opn. of Mosk, J.
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
KAUS, J., Concurring and Dissenting.
Obviously much is to be said on each side of the only issue that divides the majority and Justice Richardson’s dissent which I have signed. The two considerations which, in my view, tip the scale in favor of the dissent are these: First, simple adherence to precedent should make us follow Reinecke I. 1 Second, it seems clear to me that the course chosen by the majority involves greater judicial intrusion into the legislative process laid out by the California Constitution. Absent compulsion by Baker v. Carr—and I see none—we should let that process play itself out without any judicial intervention.
I pity the 1992 Supreme Court which will have to break the tie between Reinecke I and Assembly v. Deukmejian.