The Arizona Supreme Court unanimously ruled against a challenge brought by our corporate overlords in the Chamber of Commerce organizations to the voter-approved Prop. 206, the minimum wage initiative, raising the state’s minimum wage and providing for paid time off regulations. The Arizona Capitol Times (subscription required) reports, Supreme Court upholds minimum wage law:
The justices rejected arguments by a group of plaintiffs, led by the Arizona Chamber of Commerce, that Proposition 206 led to an unconstitutional mandate for the government to spend money. Attorneys for the chamber argued that expenses caused by Prop. 206, which raised the minimum wage to $10 per hour on January 1, violated the Arizona Constitution’s revenue-source rule.
Adopted in 2004, the rule requires ballot initiatives to identify funding sources for any new government spending.
Chief Justice Scott Bales announced the ruling in a brief order released Tuesday afternoon. A lengthier written opinion will be released at a later date.
Posted in Arizona State Legislature, AZBlueMeanie, Ballot Referendas and Initiatives, Campaigns, Constitution, Corruption, Courts, Economics, Election Integrity, Elections, Ethics, GOP War On..., Governor, Labor, Legislation, Party Politics, Propositions, Scandals
Tagged minimum wage, paid time off
It looks as if our corporate overlords at the Chamber of Commerce organizations seeking to overturn the will of the voters on Prop. 206, the Minimum Wage Initiative — and by extension to eliminate your constitutional right to pass laws by citizen initiatives — had a bad day in court on Thursday.
The Arizona Capitol Times (subscription required) reports, AZ Supreme Court skeptical of minimum wage challenger arguments:
Arizona’s Supreme Court justices spent time March 9 imagining a world in which the state’s voters may never get to pass laws by the ballot again.
Justices repeatedly posed that scenario to Brett Johnson, an attorney representing the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry and other plaintiffs in their challenge to a higher minimum wage approved overwhelmingly by voters in November.
Johnson argued that parts of Proposition 206, including new mandates for benefits such as paid sick leave, are a direct mandate for the state to spend money, which violates the Arizona Constitution’s revenue source rule. That rule is a measure adopted in 2004 that requires ballot initiatives to identify funding sources for new government spending.
Chief Justice Scott Bales opened the hearing with a question that cut to the case’s potentially dramatic implications: If even indirect expenditures are sufficient to violate the revenue source rule, is there realistically any initiative that could be proposed that wouldn’t violate the Constitution?
Posted in Arizona State Legislature, AZBlueMeanie, Ballot Referendas and Initiatives, Budgets, Constitution, Courts, Economics, GOP War On..., Governor, Labor, Party Politics, Propositions, Taxes
Tagged minimum wage, voting rights
The case of Chamber of Commerce et al v. Hon. Daniel Kiley/State of Arizona et al., (Arizona Supreme Court No. CV-16-0314-SA) is set for oral argument today before the Arizona Supreme Court.
This is the case brought by our corporate overlords at the Chamber of Commerce organizations seeking to overturn the will of the voters of Arizona in voting for Prop. 206 last year, the Minimum Wage Initiative from Arizonans for Fair Wages and Healthy Families.
On February 14, 2017, the Arizona Supreme Court accepted jurisdiction of the Petition for Special Action and asked the parties to address a single issue: Whether Proposition 206 violates the Revenue Source Rule, and, if so, what relief would be appropriate? This is the only issue before the court today.
Howard Fischer reports, Business relief from Arizona minimum-wage hike looking more remote:
The state’s business community brings its last-ditch effort to kill a voter-approved minimum wage hike to the Arizona Supreme Court on Thursday.
But it remains to be seen whether the business groups led by the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry can get the relief from having to pay their workers more — even if their lawyers win.
That’s because the justices told the attorneys the only issue they want them to debate now is whether Proposition 206 violates a provision of the Arizona Constitution. It says if an initiative forces the state to spend more money, it also must include a source for those dollars.
Posted in Arizona State Legislature, AZBlueMeanie, Ballot Referendas and Initiatives, Constitution, Courts, Economics, Election Integrity, Elections, Ethics, GOP War On..., Governor, Labor, Party Politics, Propositions, Taxes