this is not a hard and fast ruling, but rather a small, encouraging step. will now likely be brought to trial by Uber/etc
comrade @Shrewfk has generously offered legal commentary for us plebs (ty 4 ur service comrade)
is this what they'll take all the way to the SC to make prop 22 national?
pretty sure Uber/Lyft will only be able to challenge it in CA since prop 22 was a state measure, but great questions --@Shrewfk
cum_on_jack is correct that this CA case can't be used to affect worker classification law on a national level/go to the SC--but @piss you're right that it's highly likely Uber and Lyft will use the prop 22 strategy in other states , and are lobbying for national legislation too
Can we pass a law that I get all the hamburgers I want at McDonalds for a buck?
No - Uber is fine with this as long as the Trial Court reverses the injunction (I expect they will).
so the thing is there's pretty much no one writing about this shit which is why i posted directly to the ruling, sorry
This looks to be not very exciting to me.
In sum, Uber was like "yo appeals court since Prop 22 passed let's re-think that injunction you granted making me treat people like employees."
And the appeals court (today) just said: "no thanks, take it up with the trial court." Which I expect Uber to do promptly.
Sorry folks, this is just lawyers getting paid.
You're right, and it's only a sliver of hope, but the history of Prop 8 shows us that courts can overturn propositions (Prop 8 banned gay marriage in CA but was overturned in district court on due process and equal protection grounds). I recognize that Prop 8 and Prop 22 are not the same, but there are valid equal protection and due process arguments against Prop 22.
tl;dr: It's a long-shot, but it ain't over till it's over
