One Person One Vote v. LaRose
Case Summary
LWV Ohio filed an amicus brief in the Ohio Supreme Court. The brief supported plaintiffs who asserted that the legislature’s placement of an amendment restricting Ohio voters from directly amending the state constitution on an August special election ballot violated state law.
Ohio’s state constitution may be amended in two ways. The legislature may, with the consent of 60% of the members of each chamber, place constitutional amendments on the ballot for approval by a simple majority of voters.
Voters may also bypass the legislature and directly amend the constitution. Currently, proponents of direct constitutional amendments must gather petition signatures from at least 44 of Ohio’s 88 counties, equal to 10% of the votes cast for governor in the last election. The number of signatures gathered from each county must equal at least 5% of the votes cast for governor in that county in the last election. The petitions are then sent to the secretary of state for verification. If there are insufficient petitions to qualify the amendment for the ballot, the petitioners are given ten additional days to gather more signatures.
On April 7, 2023, the Ohio state legislature passed HB 458, abolishing all August special elections in August except for primary elections for congressional special elections and certain local elections.
Soon afterward, on May 10, 2023, the Ohio legislature passed a proposed constitutional amendment, Senate Joint Resolution 2 (SJR 2), which proposed several restrictions on Ohio voters’ ability to directly amend the state constitution. Under SJR 2, petition signatures for direct constitutional amendments must be gathered from all 88 counties in Ohio, instead of the current minimum of 44 counties. All amendments that qualified for the ballot would pass only if 60% of voters voted in favor. Finally, the 10-day period to gather additional petition signatures to cure insufficient petitions would be abolished. The legislature scheduled a special election to approve or reject SJR 2 for August 8, 2023. An attempt by the legislature to enact a law explicitly authorizing an August special election for SJR 2 failed to pass.
On May 12, 2023, One Person One Vote and several Ohio voters filed a lawsuit in the Ohio Supreme Court, arguing that (1) the law passed on April 7 explicitly banned all August elections except for certain local elections; (2) Ohio law did not include August when explicitly specifying when constitutional amendments could be voted on; and (3) the Ohio constitution’s provision stating the legislature could submit amendments to voters, “at either a special or a general election” did not allow it to violate the state law banning August statewide elections. The plaintiffs asked the court to order that SJR 2 be removed from the August ballot.
On May 18, 2023, LWV Ohio filed an amicus brief supporting the plaintiffs. The League argued voting on SJR 2 in August was unrepresentative of the people’s will, as such special elections historically had an extremely low turnout. The brief also warned of potential chaos from forcing local elections boards to administer a statewide election in August that they had neither budgeted nor planned for.
On June 16, 2023, on a party-line 4-3 vote, the Ohio Supreme Court sided with the legislature, allowing it to schedule an August 8 election for SJR 2.
The League was represented by the ACLU of Ohio in this matter.
LWV Timeline
Ohio legislature passes SJR 2
The Ohio legislature passes SJR 2, which significantly increases barriers for enacting constitutional amendments directly initiated by the people. The legislature places SJR 2 on the August special election ballot for approval by the voters.
Plaintiffs file lawsuit
Plaintiffs file a complaint in the Ohio Supreme Court, arguing that (1) the law passed on April 7 explicitly banned all August elections except for certain local elections; and (2) the Ohio constitution’s provision allowing the legislature to submit amendments to voters, “at either a special or a general election” did not authorize August statewide elections.
LWV Ohio files amicus brief
LWV Ohio files an amicus brief arguing an August election on SJR 2 would be undemocratic and potentially chaotic. The brief points out only 8.48% of voters voted in the August 2022 elections, while 55.37% voted in November 2022. Finally, the League warned of potential chaos if local election boards, who had no plans or budget for an August statewide election, were forced conduct one while also planning for November’s local elections.
Ohio Supreme Court issues opinion
In a 4-3 vote along party lines, the Ohio Supreme Court upholds the legislature’s decision to place SJR on the August ballot. The majority opinion states the text of Article XVI, Section 1 of the Ohio constitution supersedes HB 458, giving the legislature power to schedule an August election for SJR 2.
Ohio voters reject SJR 2
In a 57% to 43% vote, Ohio voters reject SJR 2, labeled as Issue One on the August election ballot, ensuring that state constitutional amendments will continue be enacted via majority rule.