Citizens in Charge

The U.S. Supreme Court yesterday ruled 8-1 that petition signers do not have a privacy right to prevent public disclosure of their personal information on a petition. Citizens in Charge Foundation filed an amicus brief in the case, Doe v. Reed, arguing in favor of a privacy right for petition signers.

The impact will be minimal in the sense that it merely maintains the status quo. Every state, with the exception of California, already allows public disclosure of petition signers. Thus, the ruling doesn’t add any additional burden to initiative efforts in those states. Moreover, nothing in the ruling requires any change to California’s process, where petition signers are shielded from public disclosure.

As for the signers of the Protect Marriage Washington referendum (which was defeated, meaning the underlying law was endorsed by voters), there is still the possibility that they will win a special exemption to the disclosure requirement due to the potential for harassment. Chief Justice Roberts, who authored the majority decision, specifically mentioned the possibility of such a course of action. 

Below is a link to more information, including the written decision, and also a news article on the decision.

It’s been a big week what with the Utah supreme court decision earlier this week, upholding electronic signatures on a candidate petition. That’s in addition to an injunction against Colorado’s petition restrictions that was won in federal court the week before. Today in Nebraska, the case Citizens in Charge v. Gale will be in federal court seeking an injunction against Nebraska’s residency requirement.

We’re on the case, so to speak, and will keep you updated as the gavels come down.