LITTLE ROCK, AR — Yesterday, the US District Court for the Western District of Arkansas ruled in favor of the League of Women Voters of Arkansas (LWVAR) and Save AR Democracy (SARD) and blocked enforcement of several laws related to Arkansas’ direct democracy process. In April, LWVAR and SARD filed a federal lawsuit challenging several new and old Arkansas laws that effectively dismantled the state’s long-standing ballot initiative process. The plaintiffs alleged the anti-democracy laws violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution as well as Article 5, Section 1 of the Arkansas Constitution.
“Today, the court agreed that these restrictive laws violate our constitutional right to free speech," said Bonnie Miller, president of the League of Women Voters of Arkansas. “This is a victory not only for Arkansans and the League, but for all states with the initiative and referendum process. This lawsuit sends a message that politicians cannot legislate away our constitutional rights.”
“The court’s decision reaffirms that the ballot initiative process belongs to the people,” said Caren E. Short, director of legal and research of the League of Women Voters. “By preventing these burdensome restrictions from taking effect, the court upheld Arkansans’ right to engage in core political speech. The League of Women Voters will continue to support our Leagues as they defend this essential pathway for civic participation.”
“This is a win for the people of the state of Arkansas," said David Couch, legal counsel for plaintiffs. "The United States Constitution protects the people’s right to free speech, and when the General Assembly violates that right, it is the obligation of the judicial system to protect citizens from those politicians who seek to harm our rights. We look forward to continuing to move this case forward.”
The court’s decision prohibits the state from enforcing several of the most restrictive laws related to ballot initiatives, including the eighth grade reading level mandate for ballot titles, the requirement to read the ballot title prior to signing the petition, the photo ID requirement prior to signing the petition, the requirement to inform the signer that petition fraud is a crime, the residency rule for canvassers, and the requirement that paid canvasser lists be filed prior to the circulation of petitions.
The court also held unconstitutional the requirement that a sponsor reimburse the Secretary of State for publication costs.
Plaintiffs are represented by David Couch and McDermott Will & Schulte LLP.
###