Federal lawsuit challenges Arkansas' restrictions on citizen-led ballot initiatives
The League of Women Voters of Arkansas filed a federal lawsuit Monday alleging that eight new laws governing direct democracy are unconstitutional.
Direct democracy is the process by which Arkansans can propose new laws or constitutional amendments and put them to a statewide vote. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, Arkansas is one of 24 states to allow this process, which involves collecting a minimum amount of signatures on petitions for proposed ballot language.
The Republican supermajority in the Arkansas Legislature passed a slew of bills during the 2025 legislative session, which ended last week, placing new restrictions on the solicitation, collection and submission of signatures for citizen-led ballot initiatives. Democratic lawmakers and members of the public said the restrictions will have a chilling effect on the people's right to have a say in their own laws and Constitution.
The legal complaint lists the eight laws the plaintiffs consider violations of the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment right to freedom of speech and the Fourteenth Amendment right to due process under the law:
Act 153 clarifies that the certification of ballot titles for initiatives, referendums and constitutional amendments as well as the signatures collected for those measures would only be valid for the next general election.
Act 154 expands the attorney general's existing authority to reject a proposal if it conflicts with the U.S. Constitution or federal statutes and prevents the sponsor of a measure from submitting more than one conflicting petition simultaneously.
Act 218 requires signature gatherers, known as canvassers, to inform potential signers that petition fraud is a criminal offense.
Act 240 requires canvassers to request a photo ID from potential signers.
Act 241 requires canvassers to file a 'true affidavit' with the secretary of state, the executive branch office that oversees elections, certifying they complied with the Arkansas Constitution and state laws related to canvassing, perjury, forgery and fraudulent practices in the procurement of petition signatures. Signatures submitted without the affidavit would not be counted.
Act 273 disqualifies signatures collected by canvassers if the secretary of state finds 'by a preponderance of evidence' that they violated state law collecting the signatures.
Act 274 requires potential signers to read a petition's ballot title or have it read to them; failure to ensure this would result in a misdemeanor charge against the canvasser.
Act 453 requires canvassers who are paid to collect signatures to be permanent residents of Arkansas. A sponsor of a ballot measure would be fined $2,500 per paid canvasser hired who does not meet this requirement.
The plaintiffs also ask the court to block defendant Secretary of State Cole Jester from enforcing four of the challenged laws — Acts 218, 240, 241 and 274 — due to the Arkansas Constitution's provision that ensures the right to direct democracy.
The complaint also asks the court to declare portions of existing ballot initiative law adopted since 2013 unconstitutional under the state and federal constitutions.
Supporters of the new laws said during the legislative session that they will protect the integrity of the ballot initiative process and discourage sloppy, misleading or illegal behavior by canvassers.
Instead, the laws 'weaponize bureaucracy to suppress citizen participation and violate the fundamental rights guaranteed by both the Arkansas and U.S. Constitutions,' said David Couch, the plaintiffs' lead attorney and a sponsor of multiple past direct democracy efforts, in Monday's news release from the League of Women Voters announcing the lawsuit.
The laws also 'will permanently dismantle the ballot initiative process in Arkansas' if they are not struck down in court, Couch said.
Six of the eight laws went into effect immediately upon Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders' signature due to their emergency clauses. Acts 153 and 453 will go into effect in August, 90 days after the Legislature adjourns sine die in May.
Sen. Kim Hammer, R-Benton, was the Senate sponsor of all eight laws being challenged. He announced in January that he will run next year for secretary of state; Jester cannot run for the position because he was appointed, not elected.
Named as plaintiffs in addition to the League of Women Voters of Arkansas are its President Bonnie Miller, its Benton County chapter President Danielle Quesnell, and Save AR Democracy, a ballot question committee seeking to collect signatures for a proposed constitutional amendment for next year's ballot.
'Let's be clear: these laws spell the death of direct democracy in Arkansas,' Miller said in the news release. 'For decades, Arkansans of all political persuasions have utilized the ballot initiative process to pass popular reforms in our state. Now, the legislature wants to kill the process.'
The League of Women Voters of Arkansas is a frequent participant in direct democracy efforts and 'cannot qualify a measure for the ballot without the use of paid canvassers,' according to the complaint.
'The statutes sought to be declared unconstitutional have and will substantially restrict the ability of LWVAR and its members to participate in the initiative and referendum process,' the complaint states.
Acts 218, 240 and 274 in particular 'impose significant barriers on sponsors' ability to recruit canvassers — who may not want to risk potential criminal penalties resulting from an inadvertent failure to comply with the acts' arduous and technical rules — and canvassers' ability to gather signatures,' according to the plaintiffs.
complaint from LWV
Couch has twice submitted ballot language on behalf of LWVAR and Save AR Democracy to amend the state Constitution's initiative and referendum processes. Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin rejected the effort for a second time last week, calling the ballot language misleading.
Griffin's office will represent Jester and is 'reviewing the lawsuit and stand[ing] ready to defend the state,' spokesperson Jeff LeMaster said.
U.S. District Judge Timothy Brooks of the Western District of Arkansas has been assigned to the case.
State lawmakers have previously sought voter approval for changes to the direct democracy process.
In 2020, roughly 56% of Arkansas voters rejected a proposed constitutional amendment that the Legislature referred to the ballot in 2019. It would have required canvassers to gather signatures from at least 45 counties, and it would have moved up several petition deadlines, among other things.
Then in 2022, roughly 59% of Arkansans voted down an amendment put forth by the Legislature in 2021 to require a 60% majority to pass most statewide ballot initiatives.
The League of Women Voters of Arkansas publicly opposed the 2022 ballot measure. Rep. David Ray, R-Maumelle, introduced that measure and was the House sponsor of this year's Act 153 and Act 154.
In 2023, the Legislature passed and Sanders signed a law increasing the number of counties where ballot initiative supporters must gather signatures from 15 to 50. Couch and the League of Women Voters challenged this law in Pulaski County Circuit Court, where the case is still pending. Rep. Kendon Underwood, R-Cave Springs, was the House sponsor of this law and of five of the eight new laws being challenged.
Arkansas judge will allow amended complaint in challenge to new ballot petition law
The higher threshold for secretary of state approval did not stop reproductive rights advocates from collecting more than 102,000 signatures in 53 counties in an attempt to put a proposed limited right to abortion on the November 2024 ballot. Citizen-led constitutional amendments require 90,704 signatures.
The proposed abortion amendment did not end up on the ballot after then-Secretary of State John Thurston's office disqualified more than 14,000 signatures on a technicality and the state Supreme Court upheld this decision. Supporters of the amendment accused Thurston of abusing his power, while supporters of this year's fleet of bills from Hammer publicly alleged fraud and misconduct by canvassers for the abortion amendment.
After Thurston was elected state treasurer in November, Sanders appointed Jester to succeed him, and Jester took office Jan. 2. In February, he expressed support for Hammer's bills and claimed a 'top-to-bottom security review' of Arkansas' election procedures found 'thousands of fraudulent signatures' on petitions for ballot measures.
Hammer sponsored an additional bill that would have created an enforcement agency within the Secretary of State's office to investigate the validity of submitted ballot initiative documents. The bill died in a Senate committee after being voted down twice.
On Wednesday, the final day of the session, the House voted down a bill that would have placed a 500-word limit on ballot titles and given the Legislature the authority to overturn voter-approved constitutional amendments. Hammer supported the bill but was not one of its sponsors.
Hammer was among the 20 sponsors, including Ray and Underwood, of a new law not included in the League of Women Voters' lawsuit. Act 602 requires ballot titles to be at an eighth-grade reading level or lower.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Los Angeles Times
26 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Appeals court throws out massive civil fraud penalty against President Trump
NEW YORK — An appeals court has thrown out the massive civil fraud penalty against President Donald Trump, ruling Thursday in New York state's lawsuit accusing him of exaggerating his wealth. The decision came seven months after the Republican returned to the White House. A panel of five judges in New York's mid-level Appellate Division said the verdict, which stood to cost Trump more than $515 million and rock his real estate empire, was 'excessive.' After finding that Trump engaged in fraud by flagrantly padding financial statements that went to lenders and insurers, Judge Arthur Engoron ordered him last year to pay $355 million in penalties. With interest, the sum has topped $515 million. The total — combined with penalties levied on some other Trump Organization executives, including Trump's sons Eric and Donald Jr. — now exceeds $527 million, with interest. 'While the injunctive relief ordered by the court is well crafted to curb defendants' business culture, the court's disgorgement order, which directs that defendants pay nearly half a billion dollars to the State of New York, is an excessive fine that violates the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution,' Judges Dianne T. Renwick and Peter H. Moulton wrote in one of several opinions shaping the appeals court's ruling. Engoron also imposed other punishments, such as banning Trump and his two eldest sons from serving in corporate leadership for a few years. Those provisions have been on pause during Trump's appeal, and he was able to hold off collection of the money by posting a $175 million bond. The court, which was split on the merits of the lawsuit and the lower court's fraud finding, dismissed the penalty Engoron imposed in its entirety while also leaving a pathway for further appeals to the state's highest court, the Court of Appeals. The appeals court, the Appellate Division of the state's trial court, took an unusually long time to rule, weighing Trump's appeal for nearly 11 months after oral arguments last fall. Normally, appeals are decided in a matter of weeks or a few months. New York Attorney General Letitia James, who brought the suit on the state's behalf, has said the businessman-turned-politician engaged in 'lying, cheating, and staggering fraud.' Her office had no immediate comment after Thursday's decision. Trump and his co-defendants denied wrongdoing. In a six-minute summation of sorts after a monthslong trial, Trump proclaimed in January 2024 that he was 'an innocent man' and the case was a 'fraud on me.' He has repeatedly maintained that the case and verdict were political moves by James and Engoron, who are both Democrats. Trump's Justice Department has subpoenaed James for records related to the lawsuit, among other documents, as part of an investigation into whether she violated the president's civil rights. James' personal attorney, Abbe D. Lowell, has said that investigating the fraud case is 'the most blatant and desperate example of this administration carrying out the president's political retribution campaign.' Trump and his lawyers said his financial statements weren't deceptive, since they came with disclaimers noting they weren't audited. The defense also noted that bankers and insurers independently evaluated the numbers, and the loans were repaid. Despite such discrepancies as tripling the size of his Trump Tower penthouse, he said the financial statements were, if anything, lowball estimates of his fortune. During an appellate court hearing in September, Trump's lawyers argued that many of the case's allegations were too old, an assertion they made unsuccessfully before trial. The defense also contends that James misused a consumer-protection law to sue Trump and improperly policed private business transactions that were satisfactory to those involved. State attorneys said the law in question applies to fraudulent or illegal business conduct, whether it targets everyday consumers or big corporations. Though Trump insists no one was harmed by the financial statements, the state contends that the numbers led lenders to make riskier loans than they knew, and that honest borrowers lose out when others game their net-worth numbers. The state has argued that the verdict rests on ample evidence and that the scale of the penalty comports with Trump's gains, including his profits on properties financed with the loans and the interest he saved by getting favorable terms offered to wealthy borrowers. The civil fraud case was just one of several legal obstacles for Trump as he campaigned, won and segued to a second term as president. On Jan. 10, he was sentenced in his criminal hush money case to what's known as an unconditional discharge, leaving his conviction on the books but sparing him jail, probation, a fine or other punishment. He is appealing the conviction. And in December, a federal appeals court upheld a jury's finding that Trump sexually abused writer E. Jean Carroll in the mid-1990s and later defamed her, affirming a $5 million judgment against him. The appeals court declined in June to reconsider; he still can try to get the Supreme Court to hear his appeal. He's also appealing a subsequent verdict that requires him to pay Carroll $83.3 million for additional defamation claims. Peltz and Sisak write for the Associated Press.


New York Post
26 minutes ago
- New York Post
Texas Rep. Nicole Collier abruptly leaves call with Newsom after being told she's committing a felony
Texas Democratic state Rep. Nicole Collier abruptly left a call with California Gov. Gavin Newsom and other Democratic Party members after claiming she was told she was committing a felony by participating in the meeting from a state Capitol bathroom. Advertisement Collier was speaking on a call with Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin, Newsom, and several others while the Texas House of Representatives was simultaneously debating a redistricting bill backed by President Donald Trump. While speaking on the call, Collier claimed that the Texas redistricting bill violates the Voting Rights Act and 'will prevent Black and Brown individuals from selecting the candidates of their choice because they're cracking and packing these districts.' While Martin was speaking about 30 minutes into the call, Collier suddenly interrupted, saying, 'Sorry, I have to leave. They said it's a felony for me to do this.' 'Apparently I can't be on the floor or in the bathroom,' she continued, before turning to address someone off camera. Advertisement 'You told me I was only allowed to be here in the bathroom,' she told the person off camera before turning back to the call and saying, 'No, hang on. Bye everybody. I've got to go.' Both Newsom and Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., immediately expressed outrage over Collier's sudden departure. 4 Texas Democratic state Rep. Nicole Collier (above) left a call with California Gov. Gavin Newsom and other Democratic Party members after claiming she was told she was committing a felony. via REUTERS 'That is outrageous,' said Booker. 'Let me tell you something, Rep. Collier in the bathroom has more dignity than Donald Trump in the Oval Office.' Advertisement 'There you go,' Newsom responded, nodding his head. 'What they're trying to do right there is silence an American leader, silence a Black woman, and that is outrageous,' Booker added. 'What we just witnessed, them trying to shut her down and saying it's illegal for her to be in the bathroom and on this call, this is the lengths that they're going to in Texas.' 4 She claims that they accused her of participating in the meeting from a state Capitol bathroom. AP This comes after dozens of Democratic members of the Texas House fled the state and refused to return to the legislature for two weeks to hold up the redistricting bill by breaking quorum. Advertisement Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and other state leaders ordered the rogue Democrats to be arrested and threatened to have them removed from office if they did not return to fulfill their duties. Start your day with all you need to know Morning Report delivers the latest news, videos, photos and more. Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters After the Democrats' return to the legislature, members faced heightened security measures designed to ensure a quorum was maintained. Democratic lawmakers said Texas Department of Public Safety officers followed them around Monday at the state Capitol and either guarded their offices or stayed in them and tailed them when they left. They said they had to sign 'permission slips' and accept the surveillance to leave the building. 4 Newsom and Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., immediately expressed outrage over Collier's sudden departure. Rather than comply with the measures, Collier stayed on the House floor in the Texas Capitol on Monday night and Tuesday. Despite the Democrats' standoff, the Texas House finally approved maps on Wednesday. Newsom announced he would advance a redistricting map in California to counter the Texas redistricting bill. Advertisement 4 Newsom announced he would advance a redistricting map in California to counter the Texas redistricting bill. Getty Images On Friday, California Democrats and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) released a new district map that would likely eliminate five GOP congressional seats, theoretically nullifying the five additional seats Republicans would gain if Texas' redistricting push is successful. Fox News Digital reached out to the offices of Booker and Newsom but did not immediately receive a response. Collier's office declined to comment, citing the House still being in session.


New York Post
26 minutes ago
- New York Post
Filmmakers claim late ‘Superman' actor Christopher Reeve would have opposed Donald Trump
Late 'Superman' star Christopher Reeve would have spoken out against President Donald Trump if he were alive today, according to the filmmakers behind his documentary. 'Super/Man: The Christopher Reeve Story' directors Peter Ettedgui and Ian Bonhôte spoke to The Hollywood Reporter on Tuesday about the actor's activist work, particularly for disability rights, after his tragic horse-riding accident that left him paralyzed from the neck down. Ettedgui pointed out that even prior to his accident, Reeve spoke on behalf of other issues, such as artistic expression and housing. 'There was a certain property developer in New York who wanted to develop a horrific modern-town plan, and Reeve led the objections to it,' Ettedgui said to The Hollywood Reporter. 'The property developer was, of course, Donald Trump.' The filmmakers added that actor Jeff Daniels, who worked with Reeve on Broadway in 1980, told them Reeve would have gone so far as to run against Trump. 'But he wouldn't have entered it for his own gain,' Bonhôte said. 'The way he was engaged with people was not just for alliance and power; he saw that things could be changed for the better for the American people.' 4 'Super/Man: The Christopher Reeve Story' directors Peter Ettedgui and Ian Bonhôte said that actor Jeff Daniels, who worked with Christopher Reeve on Broadway in 1980, told them Reeve would have to run against Trump. IPA / 4 Christopher Reeve starred as Superman in the 1978 hit film 'Superman: The Movie.' Warner Bros/Dc Comics/Kobal/Shutterstock Ettedgui added, 'He grew up in a privileged, possibly even slightly entitled background, but he was a very kind man. He realized that he had certain advantages in life, and I think he always evinced that kindness and empathy with other people. But it took on a whole new nature after the accident.' Start your day with all you need to know Morning Report delivers the latest news, videos, photos and more. Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters Fox News Digital reached out to the Christopher & Dana Reeve Foundation for comment. During his life, Reeve regularly endorsed Democratic candidates such as Bill Clinton and Al Gore. He gave a speech at the 1996 Democratic National Convention, one year after his accident. 4 Reeve criticized Trump in the late 1980s over his development plans, calling them 'the American dream gone berserk' in a speech. AFP via Getty Images 4 Reeve regularly endorsed Democratic candidates such as Bill Clinton and Al Gore, and gave a speech at the 1996 Democratic National Convention, one year after his accident. WireImage Reeve was also critical of Republican presidents such as Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. Prior to his death in 2004, Reeve spoke out against Bush for his opposition to embryonic stem cell research. Reeve also criticized Trump in the late 1980s over his development plans, calling them 'the American dream gone berserk' in a speech.