SAN JOSE, Calif. _ In a major victory for advocates of recalling Judge Aaron Persky, a retired San Francisco judge Monday lifted a restraining order on its petition drive _ just four days before it would have been too late for them to put the measure on the June ballot.
Retired San Francisco Judge Kay Tsenin is expected to make her ruling permanent on Thursday.
The two issues before Tsenin were whether Persky's effort to block the proposed recall from the June election is legally sound and whether the state Attorney General's Office can intervene in the case on the side of the recall campaign.
Jubilant recall supporters can now resume efforts to collect the 58,634 signatures on petitions to put the measure on the June ballot.
Persky became a national pariah for giving a six-month sentence to former Stanford athlete Brock Turner, who sexually assaulted an unconscious, intoxicated woman outside a campus fraternity party. Under California law, Turner must also register for life as a sex offender.
About two weeks ago, another judge issued a temporary restraining order to halt the recall campaign's signature-gathering effort at Persky's request. The restraining order came the day after the county registrar had approved the recall petitions.
In court documents, Persky argues that because he is a state officer, California's secretary of state, not the county registrar, should have decided whether the campaign's signature-gathering effort could proceed.
Lawyers for the recall, the county registrar of voters and the secretary of state _ represented by the Attorney General Xavier Becerra's office _ dispute that. Recall leader and Stanford law professor Michele Dauber also contends Persky's lawsuit is frivolous and is intended solely to delay any petition drive.
Persky also contends that if he winds up losing his seat, the governor should fill the vacancy _ not voters. As it stands now, the question of who would replace Persky would appear on the same ballot as the recall.
The recall campaign claims that issue already has been settled by case law _ in favor of voters. Whoever is elected would serve out the rest of Persky's six-year term, which ends in 2022.
Recall proponents also contend they have a fundamental right protected by the First Amendment to circulate petitions. But Persky's lawyers argued that requiring the campaign to comply with the state constitution does not violate their rights.
Only four judges have been recalled in California history, one in San Francisco in 1913 and three on the same ballot in Los Angeles in 1932. The ballots included the simultaneous election of successors. In 1986, three state Supreme Court justices were removed from office, but it was during a general election, not a recall.
