Margaret R. Prinzing is a partner who focuses on litigation involving government law, constitutional law, and public policy issues. Representative matters include successfully defending the California Legislature in litigation challenging the constitutionality of a toll increase on Bay Area bridges (Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association v. Bay Area Toll Authority, 51 Cal. App. 5th 435 (2020)); representing counties in ongoing challenges to the constitutionality of the unitary tax rate (see, e.g., Pacific Bell Telephone Company et al. v. County of Riverside et al., No. E083505, app. pending); successfully defending the City of Mountain View in litigation relating to oversized vehicle ordinances and rent control matters (Navarro v. City of Mountain View, Case No. 21-cv-05381 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 8, 2023); Bolhouse v. Rental Housing Committee, No. H046335, 2020 WL 7585884 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 22, 2020)); and filing an amicus brief on behalf of members of the California Legislature in a case asserting that California’s capital punishment scheme is administered in a racially discriminatory manner. (Office of the State Public Defender, et al. v. Bonta, No. S284496, pet. pending).
Ms. Prinzing also specializes in election law. She is currently representing the California Legislature and Governor Newsom in litigation asking the California Supreme Court to remove the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act from the ballot on the grounds that it is an unconstitutional revision and would impair essential government services. (Legislature v. Weber, No. S281977, pet. pending). She also recently defended the Los Angeles County Registrar of Voters in litigation that unsuccessfully challenged the Registrar’s disqualification of a recall petition (Committee to Recall Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón v. Logan, No. 23STCP02365, dism. Apr. 5, 2024), and won emergency relief in the California Supreme Court to ensure that Proposition 57 appeared on the 2016 ballot. (Brown v. Superior Court, 63 Cal. 4th 335 (2016)).
In addition, Ms. Prinzing has expertise in health care issues. She is currently defending on appeal the dismissal of litigation over the hospitalization of patients experiencing mental health emergencies. (Siskiyou Hospital Inc. v. County of Siskiyou, et al., Nos. C097671 & C098311, app. pending). She represented a joint powers authority in the first appeal in California of an audit under the Mental Health Services Act, and filed an amicus brief in a case addressing payments to hospitals for emergency medical services. (Santa Clara County v. Superior Court, 14 Cal. 5th 1034 (2023).)
Prior to joining the firm, Ms. Prinzing was an associate with Bingham McCutchen where she specialized in civil and appellate litigation. She also worked as a legislative assistant to two members of Congress, focusing on health care, welfare, and education matters.