Dana Cody, executive director, LLDF------Bill Lockyer, Attorney General of California
Attorney General Bill Lockyer has asked the Superior Court in Alameda County, California to consolidate two separate lawsuits being brought against the Independent Citizens' Oversight Committee (ICOC) established by the passage last year of Proposition 71 to spend $3 billion of state money through the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) in support of embryonic stem cell research.
California Politics Today spoke this morning with Dana Cody, executive director of the Life Legal Defense Foundation and attorney for People's Advocate, which is arguing that giving the ICOC the authority to spend $3 billion in taxpayer money is unconstitutional under the provisions of Article XVI, Section 3, of the California Constitution, which prohibits giving such authority to any organization not under the control of the State and People of California.
plaintiffs' attorneys oppose this proposed consolidation
Ms. Cody is arguing that the two cases shouldn't be consolidated. So is David Llewellyn, attorney for the "reverse validation action" being brought against the stem cell research project by him on behalf of the California Family Bioethics Council. They have submitted separate filings to that affect with the Alameda County Superior Court.
ICOC Chair Robert Klein and plaintiff's attorney Dana Cody exchange characterizations
During today's interview, Ms. Cody commented on remarks made by
Robert Klein II, Chair of the ICOC, during his Friday, July 29, 2005, interview with Lisa McRee on
California Connected.
You can read more about Mr. Klein's remarks, and watch him making them, by going to:
"Stem cell chief Robert Klein II hopes to fund first grants in September using a "bridge financing approach"; denounces Proposition 71 opponents' "constitutional arguments as a front for their opposition"
During that interview, Mr. Klein said:
"The opposition to Proposition 71, who fought us, has maintained this fight and tried to block these funds with litigation, even though 7 million Californians voted to approve Proposition 71."
Asked by Ms. McRee, "Specifically, what are their arguments?" Mr. Klein replied:
"Their arguments are religiously-based, and while we recognize and respect people from other religions, really, the people of California voted, really, 59% to 41%, for this, and the religious opposition is really marshalling now constitutional arguments as a front for their opposition."
Asked to comment on this statement by Mr. Klein,
Ms. Cody said:
"Well, he's entitled to his opinion, but I think that it just shows that he's a religious bigot….He can think whatever he wants to think. Actually, everything he says is totally irrelevant to the lawsuit. He's just spinning it."
Asked if the arguments she is making in court against the ICOC are, as Mr. Klein claims, "religiously-based," Ms. Cody told
California Politics Today:
"No. They're based on
Article XVI, Section 3, of the California Constitution."
attorney Cody discusses procedure regarding the consolidation and the case on its merits
You can listen to this interview with Ms. Cody in its entirety by clicking
here.
an earlier exchange about alleged "special interests"
more about the separate "reverse validation action" being brought against the stem cell research project
Get in the swing with additional Etopia Media News Network articles and interviews and Google Alerts
Join the "Etopia Media Live!" mailing list (unless you're already on another Etopia Media mailing list)
