This decision rejects plaintiff’s argument that the PAGA statute violates the state constitution’s separation of powers clause because it supposedly allows private citizens to seek civil penalties on the state’s behalf without the executive branch exercising sufficient prosecutorial discretion. The contention is barred by Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC (2014) 59 Cal.4th 348, 360 which held that “PAGA does not violate the principle of separation of powers under the California Constitution.” Also, PAGA is not meaningfully distinguishable from comparable qui tam statutes outside the employment context, none of which have been found unconstitutional for violation of the separation of powers provision of the state constitution.