Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

E-signing of ballot petitions during the pandemic blessed in federal courts

Digital signature
Abscent84/Getty Images

The number of cases is still small, but campaigns to allow electronic signatures to replace handwriting on ballot petitions are starting to fare better in federal court than state court.

The issue is central to keeping grassroots democracy alive despite the coronavirus — by allowing activists to show enough support for their ideas that they merit being put to a statewide vote, but in a safe and practical way while in-person canvassing remains both a profound health risk and prohibitively inefficient.

A potential breakthrough came Tuesday, when a federal judge said groups promoting a package of voting law changes, a minimum wage increase and marijuana decriminalization in Ohio should be allowed to circulate their petitions online.


It was the first time advocacy groups have won such a victory in federal court since the pandemic began, while such arguments have been rejected several times by state courts — including the Ohio Supreme Court in this case and by the Arizona Supreme Court last week.

"These times, however, are not ordinary," Judge Edmund Sargus Jr. of Columbus wrote, and the groups who sued were not out to get rid of the paper-and-ink rules forever. "Plaintiffs instead contend that they are unconstitutional as applied to them during this extraordinary time. That is, the Covid-19 pandemic has made it impossible to circulate petitions in person."

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

The judge also extended the deadline for submitting signatures by a month, to the end of July. But he declined to lower the number of voters who must e-sign onto each effort.

Republican Secretary of State Frank LaRose has already vowed to appeal on the grounds that the judge had usurped the power of the General Assembly to change election rules.

But the place where that argument will be made, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, rejected a similar claim in a ballot access case only a month ago. It struck down Michigan's rules requiring candidates to gather signatures in person to get on the ballot — saying that was unconstitutional during a public health emergency. The state has since started allowing people to submit electronic petitions to run in the August primary.

Grassroots groups promoting referendums in six other states — Arizona, Arkansas, North Dakota, Montana, Arizona, Colorado, and Oklahoma — have also sued in state and federal courts in hopes of changing signature rules or getting deadlines extended. Three of those campaigns are from groups hoping to combat partisan gerrymandering. But efforts in many more states have been suspended in the face of the pandemic.

The Ohio ruling is another courthouse victory for Ohioans for Safe and Secure Elections, which is pushing for the most comprehensive package of potential election law easements anywhere in the nation this year. Central provisions would make Ohio the 17th state that automatically registers eligible residents when they do business with the motor vehicle bureau, and the 22nd state that permits people to both register and cast ballots on Election Day.

Last month an effort to break the measure into four pieces, which was widely expected to reduce its chances, was stopped by the state's highest court. But proponents say that, electronic signatures notwithstanding, they will still struggle to get the necessary 453,000 supporters lined up in the next 10 weeks.

That same threshold will apply to the group pushing an initiative that would raise the state's minimum wage to $13 over the next five years. Backers of marijuana decriminalization are hoping to place their measures on more than a dozen local ballots, which have much lesser signature requirements.

GOP Gov. Mike DeWine significantly relaxed his stay-at-home order this week but left in place six feet of mandatory social distancing and a ban on gatherings by more than 10 people — both curbs that will make in-person signature gathering impractical.

All the groups told the court they would use DocuSign, which is in wide use for real estate closings and other business transactions, and would require signers to give up the last four digits of their Social Security numbers — the same verification required to register or get an absentee ballot online in the state.

Read More

Half-Baked Alaska

A photo of multiple checked boxes.

Getty Images / Thanakorn Lappattaranan

Half-Baked Alaska

This past year’s elections saw a number of state ballot initiatives of great national interest, which proposed the adoption of two “unusual” election systems for state and federal offices. Pairing open nonpartisan primaries with a general election using ranked choice voting, these reforms were rejected by the citizens of Colorado, Idaho, and Nevada. The citizens of Alaska, however, who were the first to adopt this dual system in 2020, narrowly confirmed their choice after an attempt to repeal it in November.

Ranked choice voting, used in Alaska’s general elections, allows voters to rank their candidate choices on their ballot and then has multiple rounds of voting until one candidate emerges with a majority of the final vote and is declared the winner. This more representative result is guaranteed because in each round the weakest candidate is dropped, and the votes of that candidate’s supporters automatically transfer to their next highest choice. Alaska thereby became the second state after Maine to use ranked choice voting for its state and federal elections, and both have had great success in their use.

Keep ReadingShow less
Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

The United States Supreme Court.

Getty Images / Rudy Sulgan

Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

Fourteen years ago, after the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the popular blanket primary system, Californians voted to replace the deeply unpopular closed primary that replaced it with a top-two system. Since then, Democratic Party insiders, Republican Party insiders, minor political parties, and many national reform and good government groups, have tried (and failed) to deep-six the system because the public overwhelmingly supports it (over 60% every year it’s polled).

Now, three minor political parties, who opposed the reform from the start and have unsuccessfully sued previously, are once again trying to overturn it. The Peace and Freedom Party, the Green Party, and the Libertarian Party have teamed up to file a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Their brief repeats the same argument that the courts have previously rejected—that the top-two system discriminates against parties and deprives voters of choice by not guaranteeing every party a place on the November ballot.

Keep ReadingShow less
Ranked Choice Voting May Be a Stepping Stone to Proportional Representation

Someone filling out a ballot.

Getty Images / Hill Street Studios

Ranked Choice Voting May Be a Stepping Stone to Proportional Representation

In the 2024 U.S. election, several states did not pass ballot initiatives to implement Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) despite strong majority support from voters under 65. Still, RCV was defended in Alaska, passed by a landslide in Washington, D.C., and has earned majority support in 31 straight pro-RCV city ballot measures. Still, some critics of RCV argue that it does not enhance and promote democratic principles as much as forms of proportional representation (PR), as commonly used throughout Europe and Latin America.

However, in the U.S. many people have not heard of PR. The question under consideration is whether implementing RCV serves as a stepping stone to PR by building public understanding and support for reforms that move away from winner-take-all systems. Utilizing a nationally representative sample of respondents (N=1000) on the 2022 Cooperative Election Survey (CES), results show that individuals who favor RCV often also know about and back PR. When comparing other types of electoral reforms, RCV uniquely transfers into support for PR, in ways that support for nonpartisan redistricting and the national popular vote do not. These findings can inspire efforts that demonstrate how RCV may facilitate the adoption of PR in the U.S.

Keep ReadingShow less
Supreme Court
Nicolas Economou/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Gerrymandering and voting rights under review by Supreme Court again

On Dec. 13, The Fulcrum identified the worst examples of congressional gerrymandering currently in use.

In that news report, David Meyers wrote:

Keep ReadingShow less