Summary
The Supreme Court of Utah considered a petition for an extraordinary writ challenging Utah’s multi-county signature requirement for placing a statewide initiative on the ballot. The court held the requirement unconstitutional and ordered the lieutenant governor to accept and file the petition and place the initiative on the 2002 general election ballot.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Utah Code section 20A-7-201(2)(a)(ii), requiring initiative sponsors to obtain qualifying signatures in at least 20 counties, violates Utah's uniform-operation-of-laws provision.
- Whether the multi-county signature requirement violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
- Whether the court should decide the asserted First Amendment and Utah free-speech challenges.
- Whether the unconstitutional multi-county signature requirement is severable from the remainder of Utah's initiative-enabling statute.
- Whether the petitioners were entitled to an extraordinary writ compelling the lieutenant governor to place the initiative on the ballot.
Holdings
- Utah Code section 20A-7-201(2)(a)(ii) violates article I, section 24 of the Utah Constitution because its county-based signature requirement disproportionately empowers rural voters, dilutes the political power of urban voters, and is not reasonably necessary to further, or does not actually and substantially further, any legitimate legislative purpose.
- The multi-county signature requirement violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because it gives rural voters disproportionate power over ballot access and discriminates against voters in populous counties.
- The court did not decide the free-speech claims because the state constitutional and federal equal-protection holdings independently resolved the case.
- The unconstitutional multi-county signature requirement is severable from Utah's initiative-enabling statute.
Key quotations
“The multi-county signature requirement does not apply equally to the subclasses of rural and urban registered voters and in effect creates a discriminatory classification because of its disparate impact.” (54 P.3d at 1087)
“As in Moore and Idaho Coalition United for Bears, the disparity in power between the registered voters in rural counties and the registered voters in urban counties under the multi-county signature requirement is constitutionally impermissible, and such invidious discrimination will not be constitutionally tolerated.” (54 P.3d at 1096)
“Therefore, the multi-county signature requirement set forth in section 20A-7-201(2)(a)(ii) is severable because the remainder of the initiative enabling statute will continue to be operable and continue to serve a legitimate legislative purpose after the unconstitutional multi-county signature requirement provision is excised.” (54 P.3d at 1099)
Factual background
Sponsors of a proposed statewide initiative gathered more than 130,000 signatures, including 95,974 certified statewide signatures, exceeding the statewide minimum of 76,180. Utah law also required signatures equal to ten percent of gubernatorial votes in at least 20 of 29 counties. After approximately 3,000 signatures were rescinded, primarily in rural counties, the sponsors satisfied that requirement in only 14 counties, and the lieutenant governor refused to place the initiative on the ballot.
Procedural history
The initiative sponsors submitted the Radioactive Waste Restrictions Act for circulation and gathered more than 130,000 signatures. After approximately 3,000 rural-county signers rescinded their signatures, the sponsors satisfied the statewide signature requirement but met the county-distribution requirement in only 14 of the required 20 counties. The lieutenant governor declared the petition legally insufficient, and the sponsors petitioned the Utah Supreme Court for an extraordinary writ. The court granted the writ, invalidated the multi-county requirement, severed it from the initiative statute, and ordered the initiative placed on the 2002 general-election ballot.
Remand instructions
The lieutenant governor was ordered to accept and file the initiative petition and place the initiative on the 2002 general-election ballot. No remand to a lower court was ordered.