Speed v. Hosemann
2011 Miss. LEXIS 429
Miss.2011Background
- David Waide filed Initiative 31 with the Secretary of State, who approved it for the November 2011 ballot.
- Leland Speed sued Hosemann and Waide in Hinds County Circuit Court seeking to declare Initiative 31 unconstitutional and to enjoin placement on the ballot.
- Speed argued Initiative 31 violates Miss. Const. art. 15, § 273(5) by pro- hibiting use of the initiative process to modify or repeal any portion of the Bill of Rights and, specifically, Section 17 on private property takings.
- The trial court denied Speed’s Rule 12(c) motion and dismissed Speed’s complaint with prejudice, allowing Initiative 31 to proceed to ballot placement.
- The Mississippi Supreme Court held the pre-election challenge was not ripe for adjudication and vacated/dismissed the case without prejudice, with judges noting a lack of ripe controversy.
- Concurrences and dissents addressed the scope of pre-election judicial review, with the majority limiting review to form and holding substantive review premature.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the pre-election challenge ripe for decision? | Speed argues for pre-election substantive review of Initiative 31. | Waide/Hosemann contend no ripe controversy prior to enactment. | Not ripe; dismissal without prejudice. |
| May pre-election review of initiatives examine substantive constitutionality? | Speed asserts substantive review is permissible pre-ballot. | Majority maintains pre-election review is limited to form, not substance. | Pre-election substantive review is not authorized; focus limited to form. |
| Does Ratliff bar pre-election substantive review of initiatives? | Speed relies on Ratliff for pre-election intervention against initiatives. | Ratliff is distinguishable and not controlling on modern initiative procedures. | Ratliff-based concerns cited; majority declines to apply substantive review, emphasizes form. |
| Has Measure 20 been overruled regarding pre-election review of the content of initiatives? | Measure 20 allows pre-election content review for constitutionality. | Measure 20 is no longer controlling on substantive pre-election review. | Measure 20 is overruled to the extent it permits pre-election substantive review. |
Key Cases Cited
- Power v. Ratliff, 112 Miss. 88, 72 So. 864 (Miss. 1916) (injunctions not used to restrain elections; respect for legislative process)
- In Re Proposed Initiative Measure No. 20, 774 So.2d 397 (Miss. 2000) (pre-election review limited to form; content-review when content affects form)
- Molpus, 578 So.2d 624 (Miss. 1991) (interpretation of amended constitution; overrule of old readings when amendments occur)
- Ratliff, 72 So. 864 (Miss. 1916) (safer policy to refrain from interfering with legislative functions prior to enactment)