Last Wednesday, the California Supreme Court heard the case of Legislature v. Weber, a legal action brought by Governor Newsom and Democrats in the legislature to remove from the ballot a duly qualified initiative constitutional amendment known as the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act (TPA).

If enacted, TPA will restore key provisions of Prop. 13 and other voter-approved ballot measures that gave taxpayers, not politicians, more control over when and how new tax revenue is raised. If California is ever to have a chance of restoring its former glory TPA is critical because, over the past decade, the legislature and the courts have created massive loopholes and confusion in long-established tax law and policy. TPA closes those loopholes and provides new safeguards to increase accountability and transparency over how politicians spend our tax dollars. It represents the only long-term check on the otherwise unlimited power of a two-thirds supermajority progressive legislature to raise taxes.

As support for TPA grows, so does the desperation of its detractors, which explains the effort by the governor and the legislature to use the courts to knock TPA off the ballot. But the question on the minds of voters is how can a duly qualified ballot measure that secured more than 1.4 million signatures in support simply be removed from the ballot?

The legal theory advanced by the governor and the legislature is that TPA is an attempt at an impermissible “revision” of the state constitution, not merely an amendment. Only the Legislature can propose a “revision” and it requires both a two-thirds vote in each house and ratification by the statewide electorate.

In simple terms, the distinction between a “revision” of the constitution versus an “amendment” is that the former is either a fundamental alteration in our basic form of government or deprives a branch of government of one of its core powers. TPA doesn’t do either. Since the early 1900s when the rights of direct democracy in California were created, the courts have found only two measures that crossed that line. In fact, a similar attack against Prop. 13 was rejected in 1978.

The “revision” argument is very weak and several of the high court justices pressed the opposing lawyer during the oral argument. (A final decision is expected in June).

The legal arguments aside, the attempt to prevent the voters from deciding the fate of TPA at the ballot box reflects the disconnect between our political ruling class and ordinary citizens. In California, under single-party rule, taxpayers are treated as second-class citizens who exist only to serve politicians by forking over ever-increasing tax revenue that the politicians covet. That money, in turn, is used to reward those interests who support those in power with massive campaign contributions.

But this is why we have direct democracy. While the original Progressive movement was designed to break the political stranglehold of the railroads, today the special interests are predominately public-sector organizations—government agencies and public employees paid with your tax dollars.

The disdain that the political class has for ordinary citizens was confirmed during the court hearing when the attorney for the legislature and the governor argued that voters don’t have the expertise or sophistication to make decisions about taxes stating that, “If the power to tax is taken away from the Legislature and given to the voters, then taxing becomes qualitatively different in the state of California. . . And you go from having decisions about taxes being made by a full-time Legislature with professional staff who have the capacity and the ability to make revenue decisions in the context of the entire system of California government; The voters simply don’t have the capacity to do that.”

Translation: Taxpayers aren’t smart enough to determine how much they can afford to pay in taxes and therefore should be excluded from having a say in the matter. But exactly what have these “experts” given us? California is failing in so many respects with high taxes, burdensome regulations, crime, homelessness, and poor governance reflected in waste, fraud and abuse.

TPA is a lawful exercise of the initiative power and, in fact, is sorely needed to restore balance to an unbalanced state.

Jon Coupal is president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.

The commencement ceremony held by University of California, Berkeley was interrupted by hundreds of anti-Israel protesters on Saturday morning.

Most of the protesters were graduating students, wearing caps and gowns. Pictures show hundreds of students wearing keffiyehs, waving Palestinian flags and holding signage denouncing the Israeli government.

The interruptions follow weeks of unrest at U.S. universities over the Israel-Hamas war, leading to thousands of students protesting in opposition to Israel.

“Viva viva Palestina,” another group was heard chanting during a speech on Saturday. Some sections were completely full of protesters, while others were more scattered.

ARIZONA STATE PLACES POLICE CHIEF ON LEAVE AMID COMPLAINTS OF ALLEGED ACTIONS DURING ANTI-ISRAEL PROTEST

Protesters were also heard yelling the controversial chant, “Palestine will be free / From the river to the sea.” The phrase has been widely deemed antisemitic and even caused U.S. members of congress to pass a resolution condemning the use of the chant.

A video posted to social media showed a group of students holding up Palestinian flags and clapping while shouting, “End, end, the occupation.” One section was seen holding a giant Israeli flag as a counter-protest.

UC Berkeley told Fox News Digital that there were no violent incidents or arrests at the ceremony.

“The protesters left the stadium voluntarily. There was no violence. No one was arrested. The ceremony proceeded as planned,” a university spokesperson explained.

“UC Berkeley strives to celebrate the achievements of our graduates in a safe and respectful environment. While today’s commencement was, at times, unfortunately disrupted, it did not prevent us from honoring the hard work and accomplishments of our students,” the spokesperson added.

Speeches went on despite disruptions continuing, but speakers occasionally acknowledged the rowdy sections. Sydney Roberts, president of the Associated Students of the University of California, was interrupted during her speech but continued on after the brief disruption.

COMER CANCELS DC ANTISEMITISM HEARING AFTER BOWSER, POLICE ‘FINALLY DISMANTLE GWU ENCAMPMENT

“This wouldn’t be Berkeley without a protest,” she said, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.

Attendees hold a flag of Israel in counter-protest as Pro-Palestinian students protest during the UC Berkeley commencement ceremony in Berkeley, Calif., Saturday, May 11, 2024.  (Photo by Stephen Lam/San Francisco Chronicle via Getty Images)

The Chronicle also reported that UC Berkeley Chancellor Carol Christ commended the anti-Israel protesters.

“They feel passionately about the brutality and the violence in Gaza, tens of thousands of Palestinians killed and the destruction of educational institutions,” she reportedly said of the students’ weeks-long encampment.

Before the protests erupted at the commencement ceremony, graduating students told FOX 2 in San Francisco that they felt accustomed to protests and did not expect any to get out of hand.

“I know the media might be talking about these protests happening and that it’s disrupting life, but that’s one part of it,” student Kathan Saah told FOX 2. “Life goes on normally, and we try to accommodate the protesters and listen to them.”

“But as long as things don’t get out of hand, it’s fine. We haven’t seen that happen here so it’s been a pretty peaceful situation overall.”

Student graduates hold white t-shirts stating the message, “divest,” as they protest during the UC Berkeley graduation held at California Memorial Stadium following weeks of pro-Palestinian protests in Berkeley, Calif. on Saturday, May 11, 2024. (Photo by Yalonda M. James/San Francisco Chronicle via Getty Images)

Another student speculated that the commencement would attract protesters, but predicted it would be tame.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“If something happened at graduation, I don’t think it would be violent,” Reece Murphy said to FOX 2. “It would happen in a manner that is perfectly appropriate, and if someone feels strongly enough to express themselves during their graduation, they should be heard.”

Outraged California residents successfully petitioned to ban short term rentals in their neighborhood after reaching the breaking point with partying neighbors.

Andy Oliver, 50, formed a coalition to end un-hosted rentals in his Long Beach neighborhood when a shooting victim staying at a rental next door crawled into his home seeking shelter on January 2.

He launched the Long Beach Neighborhood Coalition and began petitioning in his census block group to restrict un-hosted short-term rentals in the College Estates section of their neighborhood.

Members of the group spoke at a city council meeting in April, where officials voted to start looking at increasing restrictions on short-term rentals.

‘Imagine that you buy your dream home and then all of a sudden, your next-door neighbor turns his house into an Airbnb. You spend over a year putting up with loud parties, marijuana smoke wafting into your vents, film shoots, hourly rentals, strangers coming in and out all the time and many other issues,’ Oliver said.

Outraged California residents successfully petitioned to ban short term rentals in their neighborhood

Airbnb rentals in the quaint neighborhood of College Estates range from $179 to $433 per night. Pictured: a $433 per night rental in the College Estates neighborhood

‘Then on a sunny Tuesday morning with children playing outside, a 21-year-old renter who is targeted from this Airbnb is chased by a masked gunman and shot right in your front porch.’

‘The victim jumps your fence, tries to bust in your house seeking protection, spilling his blood all over your property. Your house is turned into a crime scene, you miss work, families are forever traumatized and then new renters come in that very same night,’ said Oliver.

Melissa Rakiey said renters staying at her neighbor’s Airbnb often block her driveway and threaten residents.

‘On March 16, customers of the short term rental hosted a birthday party which escalated and resulted in the Long Beach PD breaking up a party of 52 people in a three bedroom house,’ Rakiey said.

‘The Airbnb brought into my neighborhood a large group of hoodlums, flushed them into the streets with open containers, smoking weed and racing cars.’

Melissa Rakiey (pictured) said renters staying at her neighbor’s Airbnb often block her driveway and threaten residents

On Friday, Oliver was informed his petition had passed. According to the Long Beach Community Development Department of the 735 petitions delivered, 375 came back signed, meaning it passed with 51 percent support. 

‘I don’t have the final count, but there are something like 755 homes, and we just got enough signatures,’ Oliver told the Los Angeles Times.

‘I heard it was close and I don’t have confirmation of the final vote, but I was informed [last week] that we succeeded.’ 

‘There were two previous petition drives that failed, so I wasn’t sure if we would have success,’ he said. 

Now there are eight other census tract block groups with pending petitions to ban un-hosted short-term rentals through out Long Beach. 

Long Beach banned un-hosted short-term rentals in 2020, but loosened restrictions to allow people to use their second properties as Airbnbs. Pictured: College Estates Neighborhood

According to the Community Development Department there are 626 non-primary short-term rentals registered in the city. Pictured: a $350 per night rental on the border of the College Estates neighborhood

Airbnb rentals in the quaint neighborhood of College Estates range from $179 to $433 per night.

Long Beach banned un-hosted short-term rentals in 2020, but loosened restrictions to allow people to use their second properties as Airbnbs.

According to the Community Development Department there are 626 non-primary short-term rentals registered in the city.

Jean Young, 67, is one of those short-term rental owners who told the LA Times she understands the backlash from the shooting at Oliver’s home but would be sad to lose the ability to earn money from her rental.

‘I’m a part-time writer, and the income from rentals just smooths out the rough edges and has been wonderful,’ she said.

‘My son has since moved on to college and my mother passed away, so there’s all this room in my house to share. It would be sad to lose that ability.’