Citizens for Responsible Behavior v. Superior Court

Good Law
1 Cal. App. 4th 1013·1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 1444·2 Cal. Rptr. 2d 648·91 Daily Journal DAR 15844·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9995
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 17, 1991E009929California7,623 words

Opinion

Opinion

Dabney, J.

In this original proceeding we are asked to review the decision of the trial court, upholding the action of real party City of Riverside (City) in refusing to place a citizens’ initiative on the ballot. The trial court ruled that the proposed initiative was constitutionally defective and also represented an impermissible effort to amend the City’s charter by ordinance. We agree on both points, and deny the relief requested.

The Initiative

The initiative in question is entitled “Citizens’ Ordinance Pertaining to Homosexuality and AIDS.” The proponent and circulator of the initiative, and petitioner here, is a nonprofit corporation known as Riverside Citizens for Responsible Behavior (Citizens). We set out the full text of the initiative in an appendix to this opinion, but its primary provisions are the following:

1) Homosexuality and bisexuality have never been recognized as fundamental human rights by the United States Supreme Court, and the City does not so recognize them.

2) AIDS and its related medical conditions are national and statewide problems and should not be addressed by the City.

3) City shall not enact any policy or law which “defines homosexuality,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.