Clean Elections v. Hon. brain/bennett, 322 P.3d 139

In 1998 Arizona voters enacted the Citizens Clean Elections Act (CCEA) creating public financing for statewide and legislative candidates and limiting private contributions for nonparticipating candidates to "twenty percent less than the limits specified in § 16-905."
§ 16-905 (adopted in 1986 and amended several times) sets campaign contribution limits; § 16-941(B) of the CCEA cross-references § 16-905 and includes a Secretary-of-State inflation adjustment reference.
In 2013 the Legislature passed H.B. 2593, increasing the contribution limits in § 16-905; petitioners (the Clean Elections Commission and others) sued seeking to block application of the increased limits to nonparticipating candidates.
The superior court denied a preliminary injunction; the court of appeals reversed, holding § 16-941(B) fixed limits at 1998 levels (precluding legislative increases) and enjoining H.B. 2593 as to nonparticipating candidates.
The Arizona Supreme Court granted review to decide whether § 16-941(B) fixes contribution amounts at 1998 levels or instead supplies a formula that tracks changes to § 16-905; the Court held § 16-941(B) provides a formula.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Commission)	Defendant's Argument (Secretary / Intervenors)	Held
Whether A.R.S. § 16-941(B) fixes contribution limits at eighty percent of 1998 § 16-905 amounts or supplies a formula tying limits to the then-current § 16-905 (and its future amendments/adjustments)	§ 16-941(B) fixes static limits at 80% of the 1998 § 16-905 amounts, so the Legislature cannot raise those limits without complying with the Voter Protection Act	§ 16-941(B) is a percentage formula: nonparticipating-candidate limits are 80% of whatever § 16-905 currently prescribes (including future legislative amendments and Secretary-of-State inflation adjustments)	The Court held § 16-941(B) prescribes a formula (80% of § 16-905 as adjusted), not fixed 1998 dollar amounts; court of appeals reversed and superior court ruling affirmed.

Ariz. Free Enter. Club’s Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett, 131 S. Ct. 2806 (2011) (Supreme Court invalidated the CCEA matching-funds scheme on First Amendment grounds)
Shoen v. Shoen, 167 Ariz. 58 (1991) (preliminary injunction standards cited)
Nelson Machinery Co. v. Yavapai County, 108 Ariz. 8 (1971) (canon: adoption by reference typically takes cited statute as it then exists)
Ruiz v. Hull, 191 Ariz. 441 (1998) (use of ballot materials and publicity pamphlets in construing initiatives)
McElhaney Cattle Co. v. Smith, 132 Ariz. 286 (1982) (statutory drafting: if electorate intended inclusion, would have said so clearly)
State v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573 (2012) (statutory interpretation reviewed de novo)