44 F.4th 853
9th Cir.2022Background
- Montana law (Mont. Code Ann. § 13-27-102(2)) requires petition circulators to be Montana residents and forbids paying circulators based on number of signatures; these rules were adopted after documented 2006 fraud in initiative drives.
- Petition circulation is treated as core political speech; Montana allows initiatives and access to the ballot via signature-driven petitions.
- Plaintiffs (Montanans for Citizen Voting, Montana Coalition for Rights, other organizations/individuals) challenged both restrictions as First Amendment violations; they sought declaratory and injunctive relief.
- The district court granted summary judgment for Montana, finding Plaintiffs failed to show a severe burden and upholding both restrictions under less exacting review.
- On appeal, the Ninth Circuit held the residency requirement imposes a severe burden and is not narrowly tailored (reversed), but found Plaintiffs’ evidence insufficient to show the pay-per-signature ban imposes a severe burden and affirmed that restriction.
- The case was remanded with partial summary judgment for Plaintiffs on the residency issue; the pay-per-signature ban was upheld as reasonably related to fraud prevention.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Residency requirement for petition circulators | Bars all non-residents from core political speech, shrinks circulator pool, raises costs; severe burden -> strict scrutiny | Targets out-of-state fraud and protects self-government; narrowly tailored given 2006 fraud | Imposes a severe burden; strict scrutiny applies; not narrowly tailored; violates the First Amendment — REVERSED and REMANDED |
| Ban on pay-per-signature compensation | Increases cost, reduces available circulators and likelihood of ballot access; severe burden | Prophylactic measure to deter fraud; furthers important regulatory interest; less exacting review should apply | Plaintiffs failed to show a severe burden; under less exacting review the ban is reasonably related to fraud prevention and is CONSTITUTIONAL — AFFIRMED |
Key Cases Cited
- Meyer v. Grant, 486 U.S. 414 (1988) (solicitation of signatures is core political speech)
- Buckley v. Am. Const. L. Found., 525 U.S. 182 (1999) (states may regulate initiative/election integrity)
- Timmons v. Twin Cities Area New Party, 520 U.S. 351 (1997) (States may enact reasonable election-related regulations)
- Nader v. Brewer, 531 F.3d 1028 (9th Cir. 2008) (residency requirement for circulators imposes a severe burden)
- Prete v. Bradbury, 438 F.3d 949 (9th Cir. 2006) (upheld similar pay-per-signature restriction under less exacting review)
- Montanans for Justice v. Montana ex rel. McGrath, 146 P.3d 759 (Mont. 2006) (found pervasive fraud in 2006 initiative signature gathering)
- Citizens for Tax Reform v. Deters, 518 F.3d 375 (6th Cir. 2008) (distinguishing payment restrictions that allow only per-time compensation)