Attacks + Threats

Key Threats & Potential Obstacles to 2024 Ballot Measure Victories

In the wake of significant ballot measure victories reflecting the power of the people,
opponents of specific initiatives and direct democracy at large are exploring paths to
challenge the successful measures. Such opponents include state lawmakers, elected
officials, business interests, and more. While a handful of legal challenges and legislative
threats have begun to trickle in, BISC anticipates that number will grow as effective dates
and legislative sessions approach.

Democracy: Elections, Government, and Judiciary 

  • Alaska Ballot Measure No. 2: Repeal Top-Four Ranked-Choice Voting (CI)
    • Would have repealed 2020’s Ballot Measure 2 and returned Alaska to partisan primaries and general elections in which the candidate who receives the highest number of votes wins the election.
    • Recount: A vote recount, requested by the Alaskan Republican Party, confirmed the failure of Ballot Measure No. 2 by 743 votes. While early results showed the citizen-initiated measure as succeeding, the tides eventually turned as absentee, questioned and early ballots were counted. 
  • Washington, D.C. Initiative 83: Ranked-Choice Voting and Open Primaries (CI)
    • Implements ranked-choice voting to allow voters to rank up to five candidates according to their preference as well as permit any unaffiliated voter to vote in the primary election of their choosing. 
    • Legal Challenge: Initiative 83 was approved by nearly 73% of voters. However, its 2026 rollout is uncertain due to ongoing legal challenges and the D.C. Council’s decision on funding. 

Economic Justice

  • Alaska Ballot Measure No. 1: Minimum Wage Increase and Paid Sick Leave (CI) 
    • Effective July 1, 2025, Alaskans will see their minimum wage gradually increase to $15 an hour by July 1, 2027, and be adjusted in the future to keep up with inflation. They’ll also be allowed to accrue up to 40 or 56 hours of paid sick leave a year and be protected from required meetings on political or religious matters unrelated to their work.
    • Potential Challenges: Alaska Chamber CEO Kati Capozzi expressed hope that lawmakers will consider amendments next session to address concerns from the hospitality industry. The paid sick leave requirement in particular is reportedly of greatest concern, with Capozzi alleging it could lead to businesses closing or at least reducing hours.
  • Missouri Proposition A: Minimum Wage and Paid Sick Leave (CI)
    • Missouri will gradually increase the state’s minimum wage by $1.25 per hour each year until 2026, when the minimum wage would be $15.00 per hour and adjust thereafter based on changes in the Consumer Price Index each January beginning in 2027. Workers will also earn one hour of paid sick leave for every thirty hours worked. 
    • McCarty, et al. v. Missouri Secretary of State, et al.: The Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Missouri Restaurant Association, Associated Industries of Missouri, Missouri Grocers Association, National Federation of Independent Business have filed a lawsuit asking the Missouri Supreme Court to overturn voter-approved Proposition A. The coalition argues that because the labor justice measure increases minimum wage and allows workers to earn paid sick leave, it violates the state’s single-subject rule for ballot initiatives. Notably, Prop. A opponents filed the lawsuit one month after it was overwhelmingly passed by Missouri voters rather than prior to Election Day, for example during the qualification or ballot finalization phases.

Healthcare

  • Nebraska Initiative 437: Medical Cannabis Legalization and Nebraska Initiative 438: Medical Cannabis Regulation
    • The related initiatives respectively legalize possession of up to five ounces of cannabis for medical purposes with a written recommendation from a health care practitioner and establish a Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission to regulate its use. Both measures are set to take effect December 12, 2024 but the purchase of medical cannabis in Nebraska will remain illegal until the now-authorized Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission is able to write rules and regulations by the July 1, 2025 deadline.
    • Kuehn v. Evnen, et al.: Nebraska Secretary of State Bob Evnen and former state senator John Kuehn are suing to nullify the voter-approved medical cannabis legalization and regulation ballot measures, Initiatives 437 and 438. Opponents of the measures have argued that neither should have qualified for the ballot due to evidence of signature fraud on some of the petitions. Though a district court judge previously ruled that the petitions were valid, the Nebraska Supreme Court has agreed to take up the appeal.
    • Kuehn v. Pillen, et al.: An unsuccessful last-minute lawsuit by former state senator John Kuehn sought to block Gov. Pillen from declaring by December 12 the success of Initiatives 437 and 438, as required by Nebraska law. Kuehn argued that the overwhelmingly popular, voter-approved measures violate the Nebraska and U.S. constitutions, and as such the governor could not be compelled to declare them as state law.

Reproductive Freedom

  • Missouri Amendment 3: Right to Reproductive Freedom 
    • Prohibits the government from denying or interfering with a person’s fundamental right to reproductive freedom (including abortion, childbirth, IVF, contraception, and more) up until the point of fetal viability. Thereafter, an abortion is permitted if advised by a healthcare professional to protect the life or physical/mental health of the patient.
    • Legislative Threat: Though the Missouri House Majority Leader previously said his party would respect the will of the voters, Rep. Patterson and other legislators within the Republican caucus have already filed several proposals to limit the effects of the abortion rights amendment — or repeal it altogether, including:
      • House Joint Resolution 9 would ask voters to amend the state constitution to define life as beginning at conception, effectively classifying abortion as murder and endangering in vitro fertilization.
      • Senate Joint Resolution 5 would require rape survivors to file police reports before attempting to obtain an abortion.

Anti-Direct Democracy Measures On Ballot 2024:

In many states, politicians and wealthy special interests are trying to make it harder for voters to propose and pass ballot initiatives under the cover of so-called “reforms.” These attacks are coordinated and they have become more nuanced, sophisticated, and would have deeper impacts on the initiative process. These restrictive measures take a variety of forms, but they all serve the same function: to undermine the will of the people and diminish their decision-making power.

In 2024, GOP-majority state legislatures referred anti-direct democracy measures to the ballot in four states:

State of Legislative Attacks on the Ballot Measure Process:

In 2024, BISC tracked 103 bills relating to the ballot measure process. The color of the state in the map below coordinates with the number of bills introduced in that state, with darker colors indicating more bills.

In 2024 BISC has so far tracked 103 bills relating to the ballot measure process.

2024 Attacks on Direct Democracy:

Arizona:

Arizona stands out as a focal point for threats to democratic processes, with increasing election denialism and targeted attacks on the ballot initiative process. Currently, five of six members of the Republican congressional delegation and 21 current state legislators are election deniers or skeptics.

The Arizona legislature referred a constitutional amendment to the 2024 ballot sought to establish a geographic signature distribution requirement. The measure was rejected by voters, as was another legislatively-referred constitutional amendment that would have allowed anyone to challenge a citizen-led initiative’s constitutionality at any point in the process.

Florida:

Florida is the only state requiring citizen-initiated measures to pass with a 60% supermajority, which ultimately barred the abortion rights initiative (Amendment 4) and the marijuana legalization measure (Amendment 3) from succeeding on the 2024 ballot despite both receiving well over 50% of the popular vote. Early in 2024 Florida House lawmakers even advanced a resolution that intended to make it even more difficult for voters to pass citizen-initiated constitutional amendments on the ballot by requiring a 66.67% supermajority. Thankfully, the resolution ultimately failed to receive enough support to pass out of the House for consideration by the Senate. Florida’s current supermajority threshold doomed voters’ first attempt at legalizing medical cannabis in the 2014 election, despite 57.6% of voters supporting Amendment 2.

Idaho:

In Spring 2024, Gov. Little signed into law a bill that targeting petition signature-collective efforts. It instills new requirements for paid circulators to verbally disclose that they are paid to voters and wear a badge indicating the same, requires that each signature page circulated by a paid circulator indicate their role as a paid worker, and mandates that unpaid circulators complete a sworn affidavit. There are harsh consequences for failure to comply with any of the provisions and any campaign that fails to comply with these rules could see their petition voided.

Mississippi:

After the Mississippi Supreme Court struck down Mississippi’s entire ballot initiative process on a technicality in 2021, Republican lawmakers have failed to restore the ballot initiative process three years in a row. Currently, it is impossible for Mississippians to exercise their right to petition their government despite such a right existing in the state constitution.

Republican legislators in Mississippi have spent recent years introducing legislation that would significantly restrict the use of citizen initiatives. These carve-outs included prohibiting citizens from amending the state constitution, increasing the signatures needed to qualify a measure, and allowing for substantial legislative overreach in implementing new standards – all of which would have been detrimental to the process. Notably, advocates would have had no avenue for amending the state constitution independent of the state legislature – leaving them with few options to counter existing and future restrictions on the citizen initiative process. 

In the 2024 legislative session, lawmakers introduced a bill to “restore the ballot initiative process” known as HC 11. However, HC 11 would have reinstated the citizen initiative process with significant limitations from the previously applicable initiative process. If passed, it would have significantly limited the ballot initiative process that the state once had, and its signature requirements would be among the highest in the country. Mississippi is among seven states that also have subject limitations for ballot initiatives. It would also have allowed the state legislature significant power to repeal and amend measures that voters have already approved, which would likely be subject to partisan control due to the state’s deep conservative majorities in the state legislature and courts, and Governor’s office. 

Missouri:

This year, Missouri legislators introduced more attacks on the citizen initiative process than any other state in the country. Republican leaders in the Missouri House and Senate zeroed in on the initiative petition process — just as abortion rights supporters search for paths to pass a constitutional amendment guaranteeing the right to an abortion. At least 20 bills were filed in the House and the Senate aimed at altering the initiative petition process in 2024.

One proposed resolution in the legislature sought to outright ban any change in the constitution protecting abortion rights. Many bills had identical wording or were similar to others. In past years, lawmakers debated raising the statewide threshold above a simple majority by using a percentage of voter support. This year, they took a different approach. Instead of just a simple majority, some lawmakers proposed using a concurrent majority system, which would require a majority of the statewide vote and a majority of either congressional districts, state Senate districts or state House districts. The Missouri Independent had calculated that under such a concurrent majority rule, a ballot measure could be defeated by as few as 23% of Missouri voters. Fortunately the proposed resolution failed in the final week of the legislative session amid GOP in-fighting.

Oklahoma:

Earlier this year, Oklahoma legislators passed a law extending the timeframe for ballot initiative opponents to file legal challenges against measures from 10 days to 90 days. Just a few short months later, the new law is set to derail a popular citizen-initiated measure seeking to raise the state’s minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2029. Because opponents have until September 5, 2024 to file their legal challenge, the delayed timeline could make it difficult for the measure to be added to ballots in time for print and mailing deadlines ahead of the November election — even if it receives no challenges.

Utah:

In an effort to subvert a Utah Supreme Court decision that questioned a gerrymandered congressional district map, state legislators called a special session to refer to the ballot an anti-direct democracy constitutional amendment. Ultimately rendered void before Election Day, Amendment 4 sought to allow legislators to repeal laws that have been passed, adopted, or even rejected by voters via ballot measure. Alarmingly, a poll by Brigham Young University revealed that while Utah voters were overwhelmingly opposed to giving the legislature the power to repeal or rewrite grassroots ballot initiatives, they likely would have voted for the amendment due to its misleading language.

Current State of Attacks on Previous Voter-Approved Ballot Measures:

  1. Michigan: Republican legislators in Michigan are challenging voter-approved amendments from 2018 and 2022 that enshrined a variety of pro-voting reforms including expanding the early voting period, allowing voters to request an absentee ballot, and requiring the state to provide prepaid stamps for absentee ballots. The GOP plaintiffs trying to nullify these measures are using an unfounded right-wing constitutional theory known as the  independent state legislature (ISL) theory as the basis for their legal challenge, even though the Supreme Court rejected ISL theory in the Moore v. Harper case in the summer of 2023.
     
  2. Ohio: After Ohio voters used the power of direct democracy to pass ballot measures legalizing recreational marijuana and enshrining abortion rights in their state constitution, Republican state lawmakers immediately tried to strip judges of their power to interpret and enforce the reproductive freedom measure. Additionally, GOP lawmakers in the Ohio Senate are attempting to stop the measures from being implemented by changing and repealing key parts of the measures. These lawmakers are trying to undermine the voter-approved marijuana measure by increasing taxes on marijuana sales, reducing Ohioans’ ability to grow plants at home, and chipping away at the social equity component of the measure.

2023 Failed Attacks:

  • Ohio’s Issue 1 [DEFEATED]: In Ohio, self interested lawmakers and special interests lobbied to create an August 8th special election in an attempt to permanently rig Ohio’s constitution in their favor and prevent Ohioans from voting on a reproductive freedom amendment. Luckily, Ohio voters saw past this anti-democratic power grab and soundly defeated Issue 1 in August of 2023.

Why are these attacks happening?

The national fight over ballot measures began to pick up around a decade ago when a coordinated push happened across the country to use the ballot initiative process to expand Medicaid and enact other popular, progressive policies that fare well with voters across the political spectrum. We have seen another steep escalation in legislatively-referred attacks since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and voters in Red, Blue, and Purple states have been using the power of direct democracy to enshrine reproductive freedom into their state constitutions.

In 2015, BISC began implementing a proactive, long-term strategy co-created with state leaders and grassroots organizers to achieve progressive policy wins and build lasting, equitable power on the ground through ballot initiatives. We’ve been successful, so it’s no surprise that we’ve been seeing a steep rise in ballot measure process bills in state legislatures.