April 16, 1999
Sacramento.- Governor Gray Davis today made the following statement regarding Proposition 187.
As most of you know, I opposed Proposition 187. I don't like it because it pits Californians against one another. And I believe it hits hardest at children, who are truly innocent in all this.
If this were a piece of legislation, I would veto it. But it's not. It's an initiative, passed by nearly 60 percent of the voters through a process specifically designed to go over the heads of the Legislature and the Governor.
While I believe that some of the provisions of Prop. 187 are unconstitutional, I'm a Governor, not a judge. I have taken an oath to enforce all the laws of our state and our nation, regardless of my personal views on those laws.
I also firmly believe elected leaders should respect the will of the people when they have spoken. If officials choose to selectively enforce only the laws they like, then our system of justice will not long endure.
Few things make people more cynical about government than when politicians substitute their personal judgment for the demonstrated will of the electorate.
The voters made that point more than 20 years ago when they approved Article III, Section 3.5 of the state Constitution. It plainly says an administrative agency has no power to refuse to enforce a statute unless an appellate court has determined it to be unconstitutional.
Now, many people have argued that the only question before me is whether to appeal or not to appeal the federal trial court decision on Prop. 187. But a great many things have occurred that affect the legal status of Prop. 187 since it was passed five years ago:
First — congress passed and the President signed into law federal welfare reform legislation.
Second — The federal Illegal Immigration Control Act was passed and enacted. Together, these measures essentially put into federal law provisions of Prop. 187, particularly as it relates to the denial of welfare and emergency medical care.
And third — A federal court has invalidated certain portions of Prop. 187.
The significance of these intervening developments greatly influenced my decision. Because it is my duty both to defend the will of the people and to put this divisive wedge issue behind us, I have decided to ask the Ninth District Court of Appeals' Mediation Services to convene an Appeal Conference under the direction of the court's mediator.
It is my hope and belief that this well-established procedure will resolve the dispute over Proposition 187 entirely and avoid years of costly litigation.
I believe this process will work, in part because the plaintiffs have already written to the Attorney General seeking to enter into settlement discussions and because the proponents of Prop. 187 have sought to intervene in this case.
Moreover, I'm advised by the Attorney General that both the plaintiffs and proponents have agreed this week to mediate this dispute in an Appeal Conference and thereby seek to end this long and costly court battle.
Let me make one thing clear however: In choosing this course of action I surrender none of the options available to me as Governor. If any party does not approach this process honestly and with an open mind, then I will not hesitate to exercise my authority.
I believe this is the most responsible course for California. I believe both the plaintiff's and proponents of Proposition 187 will act responsibly. But if I must - to ensure that the will of the electorate is respected and that we get beyond this divisive issue - I will knock heads.
Return to Frontpage