State High Court To Broadcast Redistricting Case
Contact: Lynn Holton, Public Information Officer, 415-865-7726
January 6, 2012
Live TV Broadcast for Redistricting Case
Members of the California Supreme Court: (left to right) Associate Justice Carol A. Corrigan, Associate Justice Joyce L. Kennard, Associate Justice Kathryn M. Werdegar, Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye, Associate Justice Ming W. Chin, Associate Justice Marvin R. Baxter, and Associate Justice Goodwin Liu.
San Francisco — The California Supreme Court has approved a live television broadcast of its oral argument session in the statewide redistricting case of Vandermost v. Bowen (Citizens Redistricting Commission, Intervener) (S198387) from 9 a.m. to 10 a.m. on Tuesday, January 10, 2012. The case addresses the district lines that will be used for the California state Senate elections later this year.
Oral argument will be broadcast and webcast live on California Channel, a public affairs network that reaches 5.6 million people (http://www.calchannel.com/. An archived audiocast will be available on California Channel the following day.
The Supreme Court will hold the special session in the Supreme Court Courtroom in the Earl Warren Building, Fourth Floor, 350 McAllister Street, San Francisco 94102. Overflow seating will be available in the Sequoia Room of the William C. Vickrey Conference Center, Hiram Johnson State Office Building, Third Floor, 455 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco (map).
Another room on the same floor will be designated for credentialed news media. The Earl Warren Building and the Hiram Johnson State Office Building, both located in the Ronald M. George Judicial State Office Complex.
Legal briefs in the case are available on the California Courts Web site.
Case Expedited to Meet 2012 Deadlines
The Supreme Court has expedited the redistricting case in order to accommodate statutory election deadlines.
On December 9, 2011, the Supreme Court issued an “order to show cause” in response to a petition seeking relief under article XXI, section 3 of the California Constitution, on the ground that a referendum measure challenging the Citizens Redistricting Commission’s certified state Senate district map is likely to qualify for the November 2012 ballot and hence stay implementation of that map.
In light of the very short time frame imposed by the impending 2012 electoral cycle, the court sought and obtained expedited briefing, requiring briefing by the parties by December 19, 2011, and briefing by any amicus curiae by December 22, 2011.
###