[calcowgirl]

Just did some calculations based on his bar status (posted above). In the last 10 years, Brown has only been an active member of the bar for 4 years and 4 months (vs. "five years immediately preceding" as cited in the Constitution for qualification).

Active:  5/1/2003 to current     3 years, 5 months
Active:  1/23/1996 to 1/1/1997   11 months
  Total since 1996               4 years, 4 months

Active:  6/14/1965 to 1/1/1992   26 years, 6 months

However, "admitted to practice before the Supreme Court" can be interpreted differently than "being an active member of the bar".

[newzjunkey]

I agree that this will not fly and will stink of desperation by CAGOP.

"6/14/1965 Admitted to The State Bar of California "

Since 1965 was 41 years ago... if they had meant "active" they could've used that term. They didn't. It is odd, however, and arguable they meant that because of the peculiar mention of "five years has to be immediately preceding."

The SOS didn't catch this, and neither party caught this until after voting has already begun.

The GOP waited to long to try this tactic, imho.