Proposition 22 Ruled Unconstitutional by Alameda County Superior Court Judge

Today, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch ruled that Proposition 22 is unconstitutional. This decision is certain to face appeal.

Proposition 22 provides a loophole in California’s worker protection law AB5, by making app-based drivers independent contractors under certain circumstances. Uber, Lyft, and other gig-companies spent a historic $200 million to promote this ballot measure, which voters approved in 2020.

Shortly thereafter, the Service Employees International Union (“SEIU”) petitioned the California Supreme Court for a writ challenging Proposition 22’s constitutionality. The Court denied the writ, directing the SEIU to initiate its challenge at the trial court level.

On February 11, 2021, the SEIU and rideshare drivers filed a constitutional challenge to Proposition 22 in Alameda County Superior Court. In Castellanos v. Uber Techs., Inc., petitioners sought a statewide injunction against the enforcement of the proposition.

In today’s ruling, Judge Roesch determined that Proposition 22 is unconstitutional because “it limits the power of a future Legislature to define app-based drivers as workers subject to workers’ compensation law,” making the entire ballot measure unenforceable.

To learn more about Proposition 22 and the important issues at stake, check out Attorney Terp’s article, “The Many-Headed Hydra of App-Based Driver Classification”, which was recently published in the California Litigation Review, an annual law review published by the Litigation Section of the California Lawyers Association.