Meanwhile, in the City of Palmdale…

On Wednesday, a three-judge state court of appeals panel overturned a Sept. 30 injunction by a Superior Court judge that cancelled the City of Palmdale’s council elections next month.

LA Superior Court Judge Mark V. Mooney felt Palmdale’s at-large council election system was “discriminatory” against Latinos and in his infinite judicial wisdom decided the best way to secure voting rights was to cancel the election while figures things out. That makes sense: prevent citizens from electing their government in order to make sure they have “representative” government. File that one under “It became necessary to destroy the village in order to save it.”

Palmdale appealed, and won on narrow technical grounds. From the LA Times:

Mooney’s injunction said the city was enjoined from holding an at-large election, counting the ballots or certifying the result. If Mooney had meant to prevent the voting, the word “or” should have been “and,” said the order signed Tuesday by Presiding Justice Paul J. Turner and Associate Justice Richard M. Mosk.

Technically, the appeals court rejected Palmdale’s request to overturn the lower court’s injunction. But the city got what it wanted anyway — permission to hold the election. The ruling left the certification issue in the appellate court’s hands.

Should we really be surprised by these Rube Goldberg twists and turns, when questions about the nature of representative government turn on racialist theories of representation?

2 comments

  1. So, would it be ok to challenge the CVRA if the white vote became diluted? How are we ever going to move past race based politics, when some people are so overly consumed by it?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*