Calvin R. Massey, Professor of Law, Hastings College of the Law

Calvin R. Massey is a Professor of Law at the University of California, Hastings College of Law, where, among other courses, he teaches California constitutional law.

Professor Massey spoke exclusively this afternoon with California Politics Today about a significant point of law at issue in People's Advocate vs. Independent Citizens' Oversight Committee (CA Supreme Court, Docket No. S131655).

In this case, Dana Cody, executive director of the Life Legal Defense Foundation, is bringing suit, on behalf of petitioner People's Advocate, against the Independent Citizens' Oversight Committee (ICOC) set up by Proposition 71 to direct the spending of $3 billion in California state funds for bio-medical research.

In that suit, she asks the California Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandate blocking any expenditure of funds for that purpose, on the grounds that Article 16, Section 3, of the California State Constitution prohibits spending state money by any institution "not under the exclusive management and control of the State as a state institution," which, Ms. Cody argues, the ICOC is not, as established by its own provisions, including limitations on the California State Legislature's ability, under Proposition 71, to modify its terms in any way for three years and, after that, only with a 70% super-majority in both the State Assembly and the State Senate.

You can listen to two recent interviews with Ms. Cody discussing this case by clicking here and here.

In his interview with CPT, Professor Massey says that, in practice, the California Supreme Court has construed this provision of the law narrowly, ruling that as long as an organization is spending the state's money for "public benefit," that organization is exempt from this restriction.

Professor Massey also said it would be difficult for a court to rule on whether or not the ICOC, which has not yet appropriated any money for stem cell research, was operating for "public benefit" in the absence of a record on this matter being before the court.

He made it clear that what exempts an organization from the prohibition under Article 16, Section 3, is precisely the fact that it is operating for public benefit. Asked if it would help to establish that the ICOC was being operated for public benefit if it were to assign, under its power of self-regulation, all the intellectual property generated by the research it funds to the University of California and/or the State of California itself, Professor Massey said that the short answer was "yes." To hear his whole answer, click here.

You can listen to this conversation with Professor Massey in its entirety by clicking here.