In the latest twist in San Diego’s mayoral race, the entire bench of the San Diego Superior Court removed itself Wednesday from hearing a lawsuit challenging the legality of the election. The case was then assigned to a retired judge from Imperial County who will hold a hearing Monday in the downtown San Diego courthouse.
As vote counts continue to indicate that write-in candidate Donna Frye defeated the incumbent mayor, suits continue to be filed to challenge the legality of the win.
The plaintiffs, who allege violations of the Constitution’s First and 14th amendments, contend Frye’s write-in candidacy is invalid because the City Charter does not allow write-in candidates to run in a general election. They also contend (although this hardly seems like a legal issue) that write-ins illegally siphon off votes from the two ballot candidates. The city charter says that the voters are to choose between the top two candidates nominated at the primary election. There is no provision in the city charter for write-ins, although state law directs that all elections be open to write-in candidates, and even the city’s municipal code explicitly allows write-ins in both primary and general elections. The first suit filed, by local lawyer John Howard, asks the court to direct that the election be held over again.
The judges disqualified themselves because the incumbent mayor had served as a judge for 15 years and was known to the entire court.
Ironically, voters also approved Proposition F, a measure backed by the incumbent, to give the mayor a significant increase in power over the city government.
