Andrew Kimbrell v. John Thurston, in His Official Capacity as Secretary of State for the State of Arkansas, 611 S.W.3d 186

In April 2019 the Arkansas General Assembly referred two proposed constitutional amendments to the November 3, 2020 ballot: Issue 2 ("Arkansas Term Limits Amendment") and Issue 3 (procedural changes for initiatives/referenda).
Andrew Kimbrell sued on October 9, 2020 in Pulaski County, challenging the sufficiency of the ballot titles for Issues 2 and 3 and asking the court to adopt a stricter review standard than the longstanding "manifest fraud" standard (Becker), alleging newspapers no longer adequately inform voters.
Secretary of State Thurston moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6); the circuit court granted the motion on October 26, relying on this court’s recent Steele v. Thurston decision reaffirming the existing standard.
Kimbrell timely appealed but did not obtain a stay and the general election occurred on November 3, 2020; certification deadlines subsequently passed.
The Arkansas Supreme Court dismissed Kimbrell’s appeal as moot because the election had been held, votes counted, certification deadlines elapsed, and Kimbrell failed to obtain pre-certification relief or a stay; concurrence and dissent disagreed on reasoning.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Proper standard for reviewing ballot titles of amendments referred by the General Assembly (should Becker be overruled?)	Kimbrell: decline of newspaper circulation and frequent referrals mean voters are not presumptively informed; courts should adopt the same intelligibility/honesty standard used for voter-initiated measures or a stricter standard.	Thurston: Becker/Forrester/Steele precedent applies; manifest-fraud standard governs legislatively referred amendments.	Court did not reach merits; affirmed that controlling precedent remains but dismissed appeal as moot.
Mootness / ability to obtain relief after the election	Kimbrell: requested expedited review but lodged the record after the election and argued the issue could be addressed; sought injunction to prevent counting/certification.	Thurston: case is moot because election occurred, votes were cast and counted, certification deadlines passed, and Kimbrell did not secure a stay or timely pre-certification relief.	Appeal dismissed as moot; exceptions (capable of repetition/major public interest) do not apply here.

Becker v. Riviere, 277 Ark. 252, 641 S.W.2d 2 (1982) (established the manifest-fraud standard for ballot titles of legislature-referred amendments)
Becker v. McCuen, 303 Ark. 482, 798 S.W.2d 71 (1990) (Arkansas precedent on judicial review of referred amendments)
Forrester v. Martin, 383 S.W.3d 375 (Ark. 2011) (describes Article 19, § 22 review framework for referred amendments)
Ball v. Phillips Cnty. Election Comm'n, 364 Ark. 574, 222 S.W.3d 205 (2006) (dismissal of election challenge as moot when complainant delayed filing)
Watts v. Searcy Cnty. Bd. of Elections, 364 Ark. 452, 220 S.W.3d 642 (2005) (refusal to address preelection challenge where expedited review not sought)
Allison v. Lee Cnty. Election Comm'n, 359 Ark. 388, 198 S.W.3d 113 (2004) (discussing mootness doctrine and exceptions in election contexts)