According to Daniel Weintraub, Federal District Judge Thelton Henderson is upset by the new deal between the governor and the prison guard's union. The judge has issued several injunctions regarding conditions at state prisons in re Madrid v Gomez [889 F.Supp. 1146 (N.D. Cal. 1995)], and apparently finds that the governor's deal is outside the conditions of these injuctions. Accordingly, the judge is threatening to appoint a reciever to run the prisons, taking control away from the state Department of Corrections.
One should note that Senior Judge Henderson, a Boalt Hall graduate, was also the federal judge who found Prop 209 unconstitutional, and had to be overturned by the less-liberal 9th Circuit.
Now, I wonder: if the US District Court takes over running the state prisons, can the state just zero out that cost and let the feds pick it up? And if not, why not? Is this another example of a judge ordering a legislature to vote a particular way?
Note: Madrid doesn't seem to be available in the public database, but this incidental motion in the case made it to the 9th Circuit.