People ex rel. Becerra v. Superior Court of Riverside Cnty.
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Ramirez, J.
*489 In 2015, the Governor called a special session of the Legislature for certain specified purposes, including to "[i]mprove the efficiency and efficacy of the health care system, reduce the cost of providing health *256 care services, and improve the health of Californians." During that session, the Legislature enacted the End of Life Option Act ( Health & Saf. Code, §§ 443 - 443.22 ) (Act), which legalized physician-assisted suicide 1 for the terminally ill.
In the action below, the trial court entered judgment on the pleadings, enjoining enforcement of the Act on the ground that it was not within the scope of the proclamation calling the special session, and therefore it was in violation of article IV, section 3, subdivision (b) of the California Constitution.
This extraordinary writ proceeding presents two key issues:
1. Have the parties challenging the constitutionality of the Act adequately alleged that they have standing to do so?
2. Was the trial court correct in ruling that the Act is unconstitutional?
We will hold that the challengers have not shown that they have standing. Hence, we do not reach the constitutional question.