Replies to post #41127 on Franklin, Andrews, Kramer & Edelstein

[BullNBear52]

Obviously Brann is well read and that is what he was referencing with Rudy's claims.

In this Note, I argue that this portion of the “Frankenstein” bill, so named because of its piecemeal creation from several “dead” bills, is unconstitutional because it violates separation of powers principles by telling the Supreme Court how to interpret the Constitution, a function that belongs solely to the judiciary. This Note goes on to discuss the implications of this bill, namely the erosion of Arizona’s tradition of direct democracy, and then reviews the ongoing direct democracy efforts against H.B. 2305.

https://arizonalawreview.org/the-frankenstein-bill-house-bill-2305-and-direct-democracy/