McDaniel v. Spencer
2015 Ark. 94
| Ark. | 2015Background
- Arkansas General Assembly enacted Act 1413 (2013), amending initiative and referendum procedures, including new rules for paid canvassers, petition content, verification, and signature counting.
- Plaintiffs Spencer and Sealy sued Secretary of State Martin (AG McDaniel intervened), alleging multiple provisions violated Arkansas Constitution (Amendment 7 and other rights); the Pulaski County Circuit Court permanently enjoined several sections.
- The Arkansas Supreme Court reviews constitutional interpretation de novo; acts of the legislature are presumed constitutional and challengers bear the burden of proof.
- Key contested provisions: Section 21 (paid‑canvasser registration and pre‑submission requirements), Section 3 (signature and assistance rules; misdemeanors), Section 11 (canvasser address on verification), Section 13 (prohibition on collecting additional signatures after filing until Secretary’s sufficiency determination), and Section 18 (initial counting rules including § 7‑9‑126(b)(7) invalidating petition parts with signatures from more than one county).
- The Court affirmed constitutionality of most provisions (Sections 21, 3, 11, 15, and most of 18) but struck Section 13 and § 7‑9‑126(b)(7) of Section 18 as unconstitutional.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of paid‑canvasser registration and pre‑submission requirements (Section 21) | Requirements unconstitutionally restrict initiative rights, chill speech, violate due process (vague terms like “anything of value,” “current residence address”), and equal protection | Requirements facilitate anti‑fraud enforcement, minimal burden, provide accountability and locate canvassers; rational basis for treating paid vs. volunteer canvassers | Upheld — requirements do not unduly restrict Amendment 7 rights, are not unconstitutionally vague, do not violate speech or equal protection |
| Mandatory printed name, address, birthdate on petition; criminal prohibitions and assistance rules (Section 3) | Additional information and criminal penalties are vague and impede petitioning; terms like “disability” and “anything of value” vague | Information aids verification of voter status and prevents fraud; terms can be reasonably understood; statutes facilitate Amendment 7 | Upheld — terms not unconstitutionally vague; petitioner info is permissible to facilitate signature verification |
| Requirement to include current residence address on canvasser verification (Section 11) | Vagueness due to transient canvassers; unequal treatment of paid vs. volunteer canvassers | Rational basis exists to require contactable info for paid canvassers; term is sufficiently clear | Upheld — constitutional under rational‑basis review and not unconstitutionally vague |
| Post‑filing restriction forbidding further signature gathering until Secretary determines sufficiency (Section 13) | Unwarranted restriction on petition circulation and core political speech; unnecessary to prevent fraud | Ensures equal cure periods and prevents manipulation of Secretary’s counting time to extend cure windows | Struck down — unconstitutional as an unwarranted restriction on Amendment 7 rights |
| Initial‑count rules invalidating entire petition parts with signatures from more than one county (§ 7‑9‑126(b)(7) of Section 18) | Invalidates too much; individual signature defects should not void entire part absent fraud | Rule prevents cross‑county contamination and enables sponsors to cure by striking offending signatures before filing | Subsection (b)(7) struck down as beyond legislature’s authority; remainder of Section 18 upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- Washburn v. Hall, 225 Ark. 868, 286 S.W.2d 494 (state statute requiring ballot title before circulation aids—not restricts—initiative process)
- Meyer v. Grant, 486 U.S. 414 (political petition circulation is core political speech)
- Buckley v. American Constitutional Law Foundation, Inc., 525 U.S. 182 (restrictions on paid circulator identification may burden speech; affidavit requirement is distinct because it is separated in time from solicitation)
- Sturdy v. Hall, 204 Ark. 785, 164 S.W.2d 884 (individual invalid signatures ordinarily require striking only those names, not entire petition part absent willful violation)
- Martin v. Kohls, 2014 Ark. 427, 444 S.W.3d 844 (Arkansas Supreme Court standard for reviewing constitutional questions)
- Tsann Kuen Enters. Co. v. Campbell, 355 Ark. 110, 129 S.W.3d 822 (act will be struck down only where clear incompatibility with constitution)
- Dixon v. Hall, 210 Ark. 891, 198 S.W.2d 1002 (no grace period where petition on its face lacks sufficient signatures)