Panel Blocks Bid to Force Change in Official Description of Prop. 209

A state appeals panel has temporarily blocked a lower court order forcing Atty. Gen. Dan Lungren to rewrite his official description of Proposition 209 to include the initiative’s impact on affirmative action.

Lungren took the matter to the 3rd District Court of Appeal after a Superior Court judge last week sided with Proposition 209 opponents, ruling that the language Lungren wrote for the state’s official voter information pamphlet was misleading because it omits the phrase “affirmative action.”

Although the appeals panel did not issue a final decision, Proposition 209 foes said they believed that the judges in acting Wednesday were effectively ruling against them. Consequently, the anti-Proposition 209 campaign planned to immediately ask the state Supreme Court to intervene, said opposition spokeswoman Tanya Domi.

The language dispute must be resolved quickly because the voter pamphlet is scheduled to go to the printer next week.

Opponents of the November ballot measure sued to challenge the official description on the grounds that it does not make clear that the initiative would end state and local government affirmative action programs for women and minorities. Lungren, who supports Proposition 209, has countered that “affirmative action” is too imprecise a term to include in the pamphlet language.

“We’re pleased that the court apparently saw some merit to our arguments,” Lungren spokesman Steve Telliano said.