Raju v. Superior Court is one of the oldest non-capital cases on the Supreme Court’s docket. Or at least it was on the docket. Yesterday, the court transferred the case back to the Court of Appeal “with directions to vacate its decision and reconsider the cause in light of Taking Offense v. State of California (2025) 18 Cal.5th 891.” The action further delays resolution of a case in which the notice of appeal was filed almost four years ago.
When review was granted, court staff summarized the Raju issues this way: “(1) Does a taxpayer have standing to pursue a civil action against a superior court based on its alleged failure to expedite and prioritize criminal cases? (2) If so, may such an action be based on Penal Code section 1049.5 or 1050?” More about the case here. In Taking Offense, the court, in addition to upholding anti-misgendering legislation, held Code of Civil Procedure section 526a does not allow taxpayer standing to sue wholly state officers or entities. (See here.)
Two months ago, the court directed the Raju parties to address, “What impact, if any, does this court’s decision in Taking Offense . . . have on the issues presented in this case?” That supplemental briefing was completed last month. It’s unclear why the court now wants to hear what the Court of Appeal has to say about the Taking Offense opinion’s effect.
The court granted review in Raju in September 2023 and initial briefing was completed in early 2024.
