There has been an interesting development in the race for Attorney General of California. The AP reports that a lawsuit was filed today challenging whether Democratic nominee Jerry Brown is legally qualified for the office.
California Government Code § 12503 provides, "No person shall be eligible to the office of Attorney General unless he shall have been admitted to practice before the Supreme Court of the state for a period of at least five years immediately preceding his election or appointment to such office." Mr. Brown's online record at the State Bar indicates that he was an inactive member from 1/1/1997 until 5/1/2003.
Does inactive membership count? Business and Professions Code § 6006 provides, "Inactive members are not entitled to hold office or vote or practice law." [Voting and holding office for this purpose means within the Bar.] The section goes on to state, "Those who are or have been enrolled as inactive members at their request are members of the State Bar for purposes of Section 15 of Article VI of the California Constitution." That provision sets a minimum time of membership in the Bar to be a judge.
So, is an inactive member, even though a member of the Bar, not "admitted to practice"? The statute unmistakably forbids actual practice, yet it counts inactive membership for another similar office-eligibility purpose. The issue is not cut-and-dried, but it appears that there is a substantial question whether Mr. Brown can legally assume this office.
Leave a comment