On April 29, Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson signed SB 614, which makes it illegal for out-of-state circulators to work on Arkansas initiatives. It also bans pay-per-signature. Here is a copy of the bill. Thanks to Trent Pool for this news.
4
This Ballotpedia article explains how the Virginia Republican Party will use ranked choice voting at its May 8 state convention, to choose nominees for the three statewide posts, Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and Attorney General.
The 2021 California gubernatorial recall petition had a validity rate of 79.58%. See the results for each county from the Secretary of State’s web page. The validity was quite high, probably because a majority of the signatures were collected by postal mail. Recall proponents postally mailed a petition blank to registered Republicans, so obviously the signatures returned from that mailing were valid.
On April 29, Montana Governor Greg Gianforte signed SB 350, which removes some restrictions on petitions for party recognition that were imposed by Montana state courts in 2018 and again in 2020. The new law says that people who want to withdraw their signature on a petition to recognize a new party must do so by the petition deadline. It clarifies that names of signers need not be an exact match with that voter’s registration name. And it says that the petition for a new party may be submitted by any individual, rather than someone who can prove he or she is an officer of the new party.
The bill does not remove two other older impediments, an unequal distribution requirement and a March petition deadline. The Green Party sued in 2018 over the unequal distribution requirement. That case is being argued in the Ninth Circuit on May 6. Montana Green Party v Jacobsen, 20-35340. The panel consists of Judges William Fletcher, Michelle Friedland, and Frederic Block.
On May 5, the proponents of several Ohio initiatives filed this brief in U.S. District Court, in Thompson v DeWine, s.d., 2:20cv-2129. This is the case over petitioning relief for initiatives. Although the Sixth Circuit denied injunctive relief (and the U.S. Supreme Court refused to get involved), that doesn’t necessarily mean Ohio’s policy is constitutional. The proponents of the initiatives will seek a ruling that Ohio violates the First Amendment by its policy. Here is the brief.