That is the only and false argument we are hearing from Brown on the matter. Do laws have no meaning? The law applies today. He was a 2 term governor. He is not able to run. If it were that way all kinds of exceptions would be allowed.
It is my understanding, the law is not retroactive to prior to when it was enacted. No one could be elected more than twice after it was passed.
Whether or not this is correct, we have to accept the courts would rule in his favor. That is how the system works. Does anyone doubt this?
We need to defeat him at the ballot box.
Reminding people he already was governor and started CA’s decline will help. Define Brown as the failed incumbent.
That’s not the way the law reads.
Past service does not make one ineligible to run.
The law simply states that officers may serve for only two terms going forward.
The new law, limiting service to 2 terms, did not go into effect until 1990.
You cannot apply law retroactively (unfortunate in this case).
As much as I would like to see Brown get the boot, you cannot make a law that punishes, or applies to, a person who committed an offense or an action that took place before that law took affect. Example: If you jaywalked today and it was legal, they couldn't pass a law tomorrow and bring you to court for jay walking yesterday. Brown is exempt and it is not a fake exemption it is real. You, and all FReepers, should know that and be aware of it. There are many reasons not to vote from Brown, his eligibility isn't one of them. Stop spinning your wheels for things that are false, don't be liberal like in your actions.
I'm sure the California constitution prohibits ex post facto laws just as the US constitution does. Therefore, the constitutional amendment only applied to those elected after it was adopted.