Tomorrow morning, the Supreme Court will file its opinion in Center for Biological Diversity v. Public Utilities Commission. (Briefs here; oral argument video here.) However, I won’t be available to report on the decision until next week.
This is a much-watched case about electricity rates that affect solar energy, although that is not apparent from the issues as stated by court staff: “(1) What standard of review applies to judicial review of a Public Utilities Commission decision interpreting provisions of the Public Utilities Code? (2) Did the Public Utilities Commission proceed in the manner required by law, specifically Public Utilities Code section 2827.1, subdivision (b)(1) and (3), when it adopted the successor tariff in Decision Revising Net Energy Metering Tariff and Subtariffs (2022) Cal.P.U.C. Dec. No. D.22-12-056?” Additionally, when it scheduled oral argument, the court advised the parties “to focus on the following issue: Whether a court may disturb the Public Utilities Commission’s interpretation of the Public Utilities Code only if the interpretation ‘fails to bear a reasonable relation to statutory purposes and language.’ (Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. Public Utilities Com. (1968) 68 Cal.2d 406, 410-411.)” The court granted review in April 2024. More about the case here.
This will be the first opinion in any of the seven cases argued in June. With still three weeks left in the normal 90-days-from-argument time period (four of the other June cases should file within that period, by August 28; the other two will be delayed (see below)), the opinion is filing faster than usual. That could be a sign it will be unanimous.
Other undecided cases were heard before Center for Biological Diversity. There are still two opinions outstanding for cases argued on the early-May calendar, but they are delayed. (See below.) Also, seven of the eight cases argued in late May haven’t been decided yet (four of which have opinions due in less than two weeks, by August 18; the other three will be delayed (see below)).
Because of post-argument briefing, a number of opinions will likely file outside the usual 90-day period: Taking Offense v. State of California, argued in early May, and Los Angeles Police Protective League v. City of Los Angeles, argued in late May, could be decided as late as November 10 (see here); opinions in the death penalty appeals in People v. Bankston, argued in early May, People v. Chhuon and Pan, argued in late May, and People v. Barrera, argued in June, might not file until January 12, 2026 (see here); the People v. Cardenas death penalty appeal, argued in late May, could be decided as late as September 15; and the opinion in People v. Superior Court (Guevara), argued in June, might not file until October 9.
The Center for Biological Diversity opinion can be viewed tomorrow starting at 10:00 a.m.
