A California judge ruled Friday that Proposition 22—a measure that let so-called gig economy companies like Uber and Lyft limit worker protections—is unconstitutional.\r\n\r\n\u0022This is a MAJOR and deserved win for drivers and gig workers,\u0022 the California Labor Federation tweeted Friday in response to the ruling.\r\n\r\n\u0022For two years, drivers have been saying that democracy cannot be bought and today\u0026#039;s decision shows they were right.\u0022\r\n\r\nPassed last November after over $200 million in campaign spending by major gig companies, Prop 22 let the companies classify workers as independent contractors rather than employees.\r\n\r\nMorgan Harper, senior advisor at the American Economic Liberties Project, previously called Prop 22 \u0022not just the most expensive ballot initiative of all time\u0022 but \u0022an egregious display of the ways dominant corporations use ill-won profits to entrench their power, shape public discourse, influence government policy, and avoid accountability.\u0022\r\n\r\nThe Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and drivers filed suit, with a February challenge at the Alameda County Superior Court after the California Supreme Court declined to hear their petition. The workers alleged in part that the measure denied the state Legislature the ability to grant workers the right to organize for better working conditions.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nSiding with the workers, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch said Friday that Prop 22 was \u0022unenforceable,\u0022 citing in part the law\u0026#039;s \u0022difficult to the point of near impossibility\u0022 requirement of the support of seven-eighths of the state Legislature to make any changes.\r\n\r\n\u0022A prohibition on legislation authorizing collective bargaining by app-based drivers does not promote the right to work as an independent contractor, nor does it protect work flexibility, nor does it provide minimum workplace safety and pay standards for those workers,\u0022 Roesch wrote. \u0022It appears only to protect the economic interest of the network companies in having a divided, ununionized workforce, which is not a stated goal of the legislation.\u0022\r\n\r\nBob Schoonover, president of the SEIU California State Council, welcomed the development, saying Friday the \u0022ruling by Judge Roesch striking down Proposition 22 couldn\u0026#039;t be clearer: The gig industry-funded ballot initiative was unconstitutional and is therefore unenforceable.\u0022\r\n\r\n\u0022Companies like Uber and Lyft spent $225 million in an effort to take away rights from workers in a way that violates California\u0026#039;s constitution,\u0022 he said, accusing the companies of having \u0022tried to boost their profits by undermining democracy and the state constitution.\u0022\r\n\r\nVeena Dubal, a professor at the University of California Hastings Law School who filed a court brief in support of the workers, previously said Prop 22\u0026#039;s passage amounted to \u0022the most radical undoing of labor legislation since Taft-Hartley in 1947.\u0022\r\n\r\nIn a tweet hours after Roesch\u0026#039;s ruling, she pointed to a still-long road ahead for worker rights.\r\n\r\n\u0022We won tonight, but make no mistake,\u0022 Dubal wrote. \u0022Victory is never handed by legal edict to working people. To the contrary, our collective struggles are just beginning. May the platform plantation owners lose sleep as we build solidarity and power for equality and justice.\u0022\r\n\r\nThe coalition representing the gig economies, meanwhile, has announced its intention to appeal.