I have already noted that the states made the 11th A. of the federal Constitution essentially to tell the USSC to shove it for deciding against the states in Chisholm v. Georgia, 1793. So Californians can either follow in the footsteps of the states and the 11th A. and use their voting muscle to change their state's laws, some of these laws evidently badly worded, or Californians can continue sitting on their hands, allowing themselves to be voluntary slaves to their lawmakers and judges.
They can't. The legislature has carefully designed things over the years so that they are all but unaccountable to the people who elect them - or rather, the people they select to elect them. Gerrymandering, high salaries, plenty of perks, and immense districts, plus the vast distance to travel to Sacramento, serve to guarantee that involving oneself in the California legislative process is either a waste of time or cost- and time-prohibitive for all but the richest people. Term limits just mean that a career politician jumps from one role to another, rather than preventing careerism in the first place, and guarantees that a new crop of freshmen every session can be easily indoctrinated and bullied into submission.
On the other hand, my town here in New Hampshire of 30,000 people has eight state representatives, and home school freedom is expanding, not contracting.