Legislation reviewed by the Judicial Council: Difference between revisions
m (Text replace - " <ref>[http://www.c" to "<ref>[http://www.c") |
m (Replaced ==References== with ==Footnotes==.) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
'''[[California]]:''' The Judicial Council’s Policy Coordination and Liaison Committee (PCLC), part of the Office of Governmental Affairs, reviewed legislation affecting the judiciary proposed during the 2009-2010 legislative session. Upon review, the Council issued an eight page report both describing the proposed bills and outlining the Council's position toward them. Of the 36 bills reviewed, the Council was a sponsor of 10 bills, supported 17 bills, was opposed to 7 bill, and held no position on the remainder.<ref>[http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/reference/documents/stat_09.pdf Status of 2009 legislation]</ref> | '''[[California]]:''' The Judicial Council’s Policy Coordination and Liaison Committee (PCLC), part of the Office of Governmental Affairs, reviewed legislation affecting the judiciary proposed during the 2009-2010 legislative session. Upon review, the Council issued an eight page report both describing the proposed bills and outlining the Council's position toward them. Of the 36 bills reviewed, the Council was a sponsor of 10 bills, supported 17 bills, was opposed to 7 bill, and held no position on the remainder.<ref>[http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/reference/documents/stat_09.pdf Status of 2009 legislation]</ref> | ||
== | ==Footnotes== | ||
{{reflist}} | {{reflist}} | ||
Latest revision as of 01:06, 7 June 2016
June 25, 2009
California: The Judicial Council’s Policy Coordination and Liaison Committee (PCLC), part of the Office of Governmental Affairs, reviewed legislation affecting the judiciary proposed during the 2009-2010 legislative session. Upon review, the Council issued an eight page report both describing the proposed bills and outlining the Council's position toward them. Of the 36 bills reviewed, the Council was a sponsor of 10 bills, supported 17 bills, was opposed to 7 bill, and held no position on the remainder.[1]
Footnotes