Term Limits
- Share via
Four points concerning the controversy over the federal court’s setting aside the California term-limits initiative:
* When I voted I did not perceive whether a lifetime ban was included (despite my graduation from a first-rate law school decades ago).
* Only when the California Supreme Court decided the initiative’s constitutionality was it found that term limits are for life; and the court itself stated: “We agree with respondent [Secretary of State] Eu that the language of Proposition 140 is ambiguous as to its intent to impose a lifetime ban.”
* It seems obvious that voters are entitled to know what they are voting on before, not after, they punch their ballots.
* It is wrong to ascribe evil motives to federal judges who try to remedy this mistake.
MELVIN LENNARD
Pacific Palisades
More From the Los Angeles Times
Podcasts
The latest effort is coming from the L.A. County Board of Supervisors. They just announced a $3 million program in conjunction with some nonprofits groups to test and clean the soil at homes still standing in the areas impacted by the Eaton Fire.
California once bet big on offshore wind to help power its clean-energy future, but the Trump administration is now paying developers billions to walk away from their projects. As California’s remaining offshore-wind leases hang in the balance, the state is fighting back in court.
The Hillside Strangler murders terrorized Los Angeles in the late 1970s. The killers were a pair of sadistic cousins. One confessed. The other was set to stand trial—until L.A. prosecutors flinched.
