Page One

SAN FRANCISCO — A San Francisco Superior Court judge today dismissed part of a lawsuit in which the League of Women Voters and two other groups challenged a juvenile justice initiative passed by state voters. 

But Judge David Garcia also allowed the groups to amend their lawsuit, adding new arguments against Proposition 21. Proposition 21, enacted by California voters in March, requires more juvenile offenders to be tried in adult court, increases penalties for gang-related crimes and changes juvenile probation rules, among other provisions. 

American Civil Liberties Union attorney Robert Kim said the plaintiffs will pursue the remaining part of the lawsuit in Superior Court and will also appeal Garcia’s ruling to the state Court of Appeal in San Francisco. 

“This is a statewide issue,” Kim said. “We’ve always felt that a quick and decisive appellate ruling is very important so that there can be certainty about this measure.” 

The plaintiffs include the Children's Advocacy Institute and Coleman Advocates for Children and Youth. in addition to the League of Women Voters.  

They sued Gov. Gray Davis, state Attorney General Bill Lockyer and San Francisco District Attorney Terence Hallinan. 

Garcia dismissed claims that the measure violated a state constitutional rule limiting initiatives to a single subject and violated election procedures by having a ballot summary that differed from the text circulated for voter signatures. 

Those claims, if upheld, would have resulted in invalidation of the entire measure. 

Lockyer spokesman Nathan Barankin said, “We are pleased the court has upheld the will of the voters.” 

The judge allowed the plaintiffs to add new arguments challenging specific sections of the measure that give prosecutors rather than judges the discretion to decide whether juveniles should be tried as adults in certain cases. 

The lawsuit claims those provisions violate the separation of powers doctrine and the constitutional guarantees of due process and equal protection. 

The plaintiffs originally filed their lawsuit containing the first two claims directly in the state Supreme Court last April. 

After the panel refused in May to take up t he case, the groups refiled their lawsuit in San Francisco Superior Court.  

The trial court and appeals court rulings in the lawsuit can eventually be appealed back to the state Supreme Court.