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. When elected officials override or obstruct initiatives passed by their constituents, it allows them to advance increasingly draconian or unpopular policies under the guise of legislative authority, often through legislative-referred measures that face less public scrutiny. Worse still, it empowers a political minority — frequently out of step with prevailing public opinion — to impose its will on the majority.

Democracy: Elections, Government, and Judiciary 

Economic Justice

  • Alaska Ballot Measure No. 1: Minimum Wage Increase and Paid Sick Leave 
    • Alaskans will now 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.
    • Legislative Threat:House Bill 161 proposes stripping seasonal workers of the right to accrue paid sick leave and gives an exemption from that requirement to businesses with fewer than 50 employees. Currently, that exemption is limited to businesses with fewer than 15.
      • This is the first bill we’ve seen that looks to curtail Ballot Measure 1, which is set to take effect on July 1.
    • Executive Threat: With his May 9 administrative order, Alaska Governor Dunleavy is using the impact of low revenue from oil production as a cover to freeze additional and/or planned spending, travel, and new regulation packages that don’t already have a public notice attached to them — e.g. Measure 1. He argues that the freeze is necessary so that agencies can focus on the state’s “core mission” of providing essential services and to “maximize operational efficiency”. The Dept. of Labor and Workforce Development was expected to issue Sick Leave/Minimum Wage regulations over the past couple months but failed to do so. 
  • 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. 
      • The initial minimum wage increase to $13.75/hour is now in effect as of January 1, 2025.
    • Legislative Block: The newly-passed House Bill 567 has largely overturned the votes of the 1.6 million Missourians who supported Prop. A’s schedule of ongoing, inflation-informed minimum wage increases, and effectively stripped 700,000 workers of the guaranteed right to earn paid sick leave. The day following the bill’s passage, hundreds gathered on the steps of the Missouri state capitol to protest. A leader of United Auto Workers Local 2250 told the crowd “your legislature has gone rogue” and referred to the “unmitigated gall” of lawmakers who insisted voters didn’t understand what they approved at the ballot box.
    • Legal Victory: In a unanimous ruling, the Missouri Supreme Court upheld Prop. A following a lawsuit that alleged the citizen’s initiative had violated the single-subject rule and lacked a clear title. Originally filed by predominantly business interest groups that were ultimately dismissed by the Missouri Supreme Court, the lawsuit sought to overturn the voter-approved Proposition A.
  • Nebraska Initiative 436: Paid Sick Leave
    • Nebraskans overwhelmingly voted to stand with workers by passing paid sick leave in the state. An estimated 250,000 Nebraskans who currently lack paid sick days can now earn one hour of leave for every thirty hours they work — and be protected from retaliation for using it.
    • Legislative Threat: Nebraska’s unicameral assembly has passed LB 415, a bill designed to gut 2024’s overwhelmingly popular paid sick leave initiative. The legislation not only strips seasonal agricultural and temporary workers of the guaranteed right to earn paid sick leave, it also strikes down the ability for workers to sue employers who retaliate against them for legally using their earned sick leave. Paid Sick Leave for Nebraskans has said LB 415 will remove paid sick leave protections for 140,000 Nebraskan workers and their families.

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. 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.
    • Legislative Support: Despite 71% of Nebraska voters approving the legalization of medical marijuana last November, a bill designed to implement the citizen-led initiative has stalled in the state assembly. LB 677 was designed to create a funding structure for the regulation commission set up by I-438; without appropriate funding it’s unclear how the commission would meet the July 1, 2025 deadline to set new regulations and the October 1 deadline to begin licensing medical dispensaries. An amendment filed to LB 376 that intended to protect physicians from liabilities for prescribing medical marijuana to patients has also failed to gain support with state lawmakers. Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers, a staunch opponent of the initiatives, has said that providers who recommend medical cannabis could be at risk for disciplinary action from his office.
    • 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 agreed to take up the appeal. Kuehn has since amended his lawsuit to add several parties. The additions are a strategy to stop the individuals tasked with implementing the laws from doing so.
      • The three commissioners of the Nebraska Liquor Control Commission who will serve on the new Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission.
      • State Treasurer Tom Briese and Tax Commissioner Jim Kamm, who will oversee the new collection of sales taxes on medical cannabis. 
      • CEO Steve Corsi of the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services, whose department handles oversight of medical practitioners.
    • 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

  • Arizona Prop. 139: Right to Abortion
    • Creates a constitutional right to an abortion up until the point of viability, with exceptions for the life and physical or mental health of the pregnant person.
    • Legislative Support & Challenges: Though there have been a number of bills filed both in support of implementing Prop. 139 (HB 2463, HB 2464, HB 2743, HB 2746, SB 1398) and challenging it (HCR 2058, HB 2547, HB 2681), currently none have gained traction in the legislature and it is unclear if any will be further considered before the close of the legislative session.
    • Legal Victory: A Maricopa County Superior Court judge has permanently blocked Arizona’s 15-week abortion ban following a lawsuit filed by Planned Parenthood Arizona and two OB-GYNs that argued the ban was unconstitutional due to Prop. 39’s victory. The judge’s order declared the 2022 law “immediately and permanently and forever enjoined.”
    • Legal Victory: A four-year litigation challenging a ‘fetal rights’ law has been dismissed. The parties agreed that the passage of Prop. 139 made the issue moot. Both sides are claiming victory: The Arizona attorney general has vowed not to take any action under the law given that constitutional rights override statutory laws, but the judge in the case didn’t go as far as to declare the law unenforceable and the statute is still on the books. 
  • Maryland Question 1: Right to Reproductive Freedom
    • Enshrined in their state constitution’s Declaration of Rights the essential freedoms to access abortion, contraception, and other reproductive health services.
    • Legislative Victory: The passage of House Bill 930 established the Public Health Abortion Grant Program to improve access to abortion care for individuals in Maryland who lack sufficient resources.
    • Legislative Victory: A bill that sought to require a 24-hour waiting period between a patient’s ultrasound and an abortion procedure was ultimately withdrawn by its sponsor.
  • 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: With the eleventh-hour passage of House Joint Resolution 73, the Missouri legislature has sent a near-total abortion ban and anti-trans attack to the ballot for voter approval. The proposal aims to repeal the citizen-led reproductive freedom initiative that more than 1.5 million Missourians passed last year. The legislatively-referred constitutional amendment would once again ban abortion in the state with very limited exceptions and bar trans youth from receiving gender-affirming care. The proposed amendment will likely be placed on the November 2026 General Election ballot, unless Gov. Kehoe calls for a special election before then.
    • Legal Threat: On orders from the Missouri Supreme Court, a district court judge has officially vacated the temporary injunctions that had allowed abortion clinics to resume providing care in the state. The targeted regulations of abortion providers, or TRAP laws, are once again enforceable while reproductive rights advocates and anti-abortion activists wait to learn if there will be a new hearing on the  or a new judgment on the case previously filed by Planned Parenthood Great Plains and Planned Parenthood Great Rivers. Using the newly passed Senate Bill 22, Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey filed legal challenges to the two preliminary injunctions. The bill empowers the state attorney general to appeal preliminary injunctions granted in cases where the state or a statewide official is blocked from enforcing an existing law or statute; in this case the requirements that abortion providers have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, that clinics meet targeted licensing requirements, and that patients endure a 72-hour waiting period before receiving care.
  • Montana CI-128: Right to Abortion
    • Affirms the state’s constitutional right to make decisions about one’s pregnancy, including the right to abortion up to the point of viability.
    • Legislative Victory: House Bill 316, a proposed constitutional amendment that would have asked voters to define “person” as beginning at fertilization or conception, has failed to secure enough support in the legislature to make it to the ballot.

State of Legislative Attacks on the Ballot Measure Process

2025 Attacks on Direct Democracy

BISC is currently tracking 71 active pieces of legislation related to direct democracy, at least 30 of which seek to limit the People’s Tool. Lawmakers opposed to direct democracy are again trying to limit the People’s Tool and have already filed dozens of bills attacking the ballot initiative process. See below for a selection of notable examples. As 2025 legislative sessions move forward, BISC will continue to track legislation affecting direct democracy as part of our critical work to Defend Direct Democracy.

Examples of 2025 Legislative Attacks on Direct Democracy:

  • Arkansas
    • [PASSED] House Bill 1222 prohibits the standard practice of submitting multiple versions of an initiative to the state attorney general simultaneously in order to ensure that at least one will pass muster. Campaigns must now wait until Version A is rejected before submitting Version B. Additionally, the state attorney general will be tasked with reviewing initiative language for conflicts with the U.S. constitution or federal statutes, likely related to a trend of bills arguing that the U.S. constitution prohibits abortion.
    • [PASSED] Senate Bill 207 requires canvassers to inform signers that petition fraud is a Class A misdemeanor. If the canvasser fails to do so, they can be charged with a Class A misdemeanor themself.  
    • [PASSED] Senate Bill 210 requires that petition signers read the complete ballot language in the presence of a canvasser or have it read to them. If they don’t — perhaps because they have already done their research — that canvasser could be charged with a misdemeanor.
    • [FAILED] Dubiously titled the ‘Protect the Constitution Act’, Senate Bill 586 would have required a 67% supermajority threshold for constitutional amendments to pass, making it all but impossible for grassroots groups to succeed at the ballot box. While the bill failed on the Senate floor with a number of Republicans joining Democrats in rejecting it, the proposal could still be revived before the legislative session ends on April 16.
  • Florida
    • [PASSED] HB 1205 severely hinders the state’s ballot initiative process by drastically reducing the signature submission timeline, increasing filing fees (including requiring campaigns pay a $1 million bond), permitting criminal investigations into volunteer canvassers, and creating a complicated signature verification process for petitions which would burden election offices.
    • In his call for a 2025 special session, Gov. DeSantis asked legislators to crack down on citizen-led ballot initiatives. His requests included prohibiting standard signature collection, authorizing the Secretary of State to de-certify an initiative if that person determines that there aren’t enough valid signatures, and requiring that an initiative’s fiscal impact statement be drafted solely by the governor’s appointees.
  • Idaho
    • [FAILED] House Bill 2 would have required ballot initiatives to earn at least 60% of the vote in order to pass.
    • [FAILED] House Bill 85 could have allowed the governor to veto voter-approved citizen initiatives.
  • Missouri
    • [PASSED] Senate Bill 22 prohibits anyone but the legislature or the Missouri Secretary of State from making edits to a legislatively-referred measure’s ballot language. Additionally, it empowers the state attorney general to appeal preliminary injunctions granted in cases where the state or a statewide official is blocked from enforcing an existing law or statute (like the injunctions that have allowed abortion procedures to resume in the state). The bill is already being litigated over six named violations of constitutional law.
  • Montana
    • [FAILED] Senate Bill 13 would have replaced the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction for ballot review with District Court jurisdiction, likely due to a years-long legislative campaign to weaken Montana Supreme Court power over allegations that its justices are too liberal.
    • [PASSED] House Bill 201 requires that paid signature collectors wear a badge stating that they are paid and disclosing the state where they live.
  • Oklahoma
    • [PASSED] Senate Bill 1027 limits the number of signatures that can be collected in each county to just 11.5% of votes cast in the most recent gubernatorial election for a statutory change and 20.8% for a constitutional change. This harmful measure would not only dilute voting power from those who live in more urban areas like Tulsa and Oklahoma City, but would negatively affect those in rural areas as well. For example, only a few dozen voters could have their petition signatures be counted in the state’s smallest county.
  • South Dakota
    • [PASSED] House Joint Resolution 5003 will now ask voters to approve a requirement that constitutional amendments to receive 60% of the vote to pass.
    • [VETOED] House Bill 1169 would have required campaigns for citizen-initiated amendments to gather petition signatures from each state senate district.
  • Utah
    • [PASSED] Senate Bill 73 holds citizen-proposed state statutes to the same standard as legislatively-referred constitutional amendments by requiring campaigns to publish initiative text in at least one newspaper in every Utah county. At an estimated cost of $1.4 million, such a requirement would make it all but impossible for citizens and grassroots campaigns to lead a ballot initiative effort.
    • [PASSED] Senate Joint Resolution 2 will now ask voters to approve a requirement that any initiative that would raise taxes must receive at least 60% voter approval in order to pass.

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.