California courts hold the view that structural changes are revisory in nature.
Under Bess, a measure can be struck as revisory merely because it has too many words, while another can pass as amendatory, even if it tampers with the distribution of powers among the coordinate branches.
Constitutional defects--for example, slavery and the disenfranchisement of blacks and women--have been corrected by the amendatory process, but a presidential revisory
power harkens back to the dispensing and suspending powers of the Stuart kings, and to the Lockean prerogative.
The court responded to charges that the measure was revisory
in nature and that it substantially altered the constitutional framework by holding that any determination of ultimate effects was "simply unfathomable at this time.
817, 824-25 (1994) (noting that in the federal system "[a] court must follow the precedents established by the court(s) directly above it" but may "ignore precedents established by other courts so long as they lack revisory
jurisdiction over it").