Judge Gail Ohanesian had heard almost three hours of arguments over the redistricting initiative Proposition 77, but took only about 25 minutes to retreat to her chambers and return with a ruling.

And even Republicans in the courtroom seemed to know... it was not going to go the way of Prop 77 proponent Ted Costa, nor the way of the measure's biggest cheerleader, Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Much more on the ruling can be heard on Friday morning's edition of The California Report, which leaves this posting to offer a few sidenotes and looks ahead:

* The language snafus were discovered sometime between May 5 (when Costa started submitting signatures) and June 10 (when the attorney who helped draft Prop 77, Dan Kolkey, wrote a memo outlining the problems). Attorney Deborah Caplan, representing the No On 77 campaign, alleged that "proponents deliberately ran out the clock" by waiting to tell McPherson's staffers about the problems only after Prop 77 had been certified.

* Kolkey seemed to imply that while voters signed a version different than the one submitted to Lockyer, at least they all signed the same one. But that idea was called into question by the written statements from two local elections officials. Why? Because both versions of Prop 77 had the same title and summary... and elections officials were only checking to make sure the correct summary was on every page, not checking the language of the initiative. In other words, argued Prop 77 opponents, some of the signatures counted towards qualifying the measure may have been on one version... and some may have been on the other version.

* A particularly interesting exchange featured Judge Ohanesian asking Prop 77 attorney Dan Kolkey whether redistricting was even feasible in time for the June 2006 primary. Kolkey admitted that the first candidate filing deadline for legislative seats is on December 5, less than one month after the November 8 election. Brand new districts could be drawn for the Legislature and Congress by then? "We think, while tight, it could be done," said Kolkey. The judge smiled, and said she thought it sounded "unrealistic."

* And an odd twist: Prop 77 proponents would likely appeal the case to the Third District Court of Appeals. Interestingly, that's the same appellate court which used to have an associate justice by the name of Dan Kolkey. Kolkey told reporters he doesn't think his current role as an attorney representing Prop 77... and his former place of employment... is any conflict.