Propositioning people is what prostitutes do for a living, of course, but not usually on this scale. The hookers of the City by the Bay want the people of San Francisco to de facto legalize their trade by approving Proposition K on tomorrow's ballot. Jesse McKinley has this story in Saturday's NYT. Doug Berman has this post at SL&P.

Now, a city or county (SF is both) ordinance can't repeal a state statute, so the measure "would forbid the city police from using any resources to investigate or prosecute people who engage in prostitution." Mayor Gavin Newsom and DA Kamala Harris, neither of whom is known for an excess of good sense, have enough to oppose this one.

The framers of California's Constitution were aware of the problem of local authorities failing to enforce state law. There is early California history of that in ... guess where. Article V § 13 provides, "Whenever in the opinion of the Attorney General any law of the State is not being adequately enforced in any county, it shall be the duty of the Attorney General to prosecute any violations of law of which the superior court shall have jurisdiction,* and in such cases the Attorney General shall have all the powers of a district attorney."

* At the time this provision was written, the criminal jurisdiction of the superior court was felonies. Misdemeanors went to municipal court. Now that our trial courts are consolidated and muni court is extinct, all crimes are within the jurisdiction of the superior court. Prostitution is a misdemeanor. (Penal Code § 653.26.) Pimping is a felony. (Penal Code § 266i.) Would the AG be duty bound to enforce both of these or only the latter? Would all the DAG's quit? Let's hope the measure is defeated and we don't have to find out.