Rothenberg v. Husted, 129 Ohio St. 3d 447

This is an original action challenging the sufficiency of an initiative petition proposing a constitutional amendment to preserve Ohioans’ health-care choice.
Relator Brian Rothenberg alleges the petition lacks a sufficient number of valid signatures under Ohio Const. Art. II, Secs. 1a and 1g for submission in the November 8, 2011 election.
The Secretary of State’s interpretation of R.C. provisions regarding signatures and circulator status is at issue.
The challenge contends paid circulators’ status as independent contractors and how signatures are attributed affect petition validity.
The Supreme Court denies relief, applying deference to the Secretary of State’s statutory construction and liberal construction of the initiative right.
The court notes that part-petitions by compensated circulators may be valid and that circulators listing the payer as the employing entity does not automatically invalidate signatures.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of signatures for submission	Rothenberg argues petition lacks valid signatures	Husted argues signatures meet statutory requirements	Denied
Effect of listing payer as employing entity	Rothenberg contends this listing invalidates part-petitions	Husted’s construction is proper under R.C. 3501.38(E)(1)	Denied
Need for compensation statements by paid circulators	Rothenberg asserts paid circulators must file statements	Secretary argues statements not required for supervisory/organizing role	Denied

State ex rel. Lucas Cty. Republican Party Exec. Commmt. v. Brunner, 125 Ohio St.3d 427 (2010-Ohio-1873) (deference to secretary’s statutory construction; liberal initiative-rights construction)
State ex rel. Ohio Liberty Council v. Brunner, 125 Ohio St.3d 315 (2010-Ohio-1845) (liberal construction of citizens’ right of initiative)