Document: 486 U.S. 414 108 S.Ct. 1886 100 L.Ed.2d 425 Natalie MEYER, Colorado Secretary of State, and Duane Woodard, Attorney General, Appellants,v.Paul K. GRANT et al. No. 87-920. Argued April 25, 1988. Decided June 6, Syllabus A statute allows a proposed state constitutional amendment to be placed on general election ballot if its proponents can obtain the signatures at least five percent total number qualified voters an "initiative petition" within 6-month period, but makes it felony pay petition circulators. Concluding that they would need assistance paid personnel required allotted time, appellee remove motor carriers from Public Utilities Commission's jurisdiction brought suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against appellant officials seeking declaration statutory payment prohibition violated their First Amendment rights. The District Court upheld statute, Appeals ultimately reversed, holding violates Amendment, as made applicable States by Fourteenth Amendment. Held: use circulators abridges appellees' right engage in political speech violation Amendments. Pp. 420-428. (a) is subject exacting scrutiny, since circulation initiative deregulate trucking industry necessarily constitutes "core speech," for which protection zenith. burdens such two ways: First, limits voices will convey message hours speak and, therefore, size audience reach. Second, less likely appellees garner necessary signatures, thus limiting ability make matter focus statewide discussion. statute's burden not relieved fact other avenues expression remain open appellees, most effective, fundamental, perhaps economical means achieving direct, one-on-one communication, utilize itself protected Nor rendered acceptable State's claimed authority impose limitations scope state-created legislate initiative; power ban initiatives entirely does include limit discussion issues raised petitions. Posadas de Puerto Rico Associates v. Tourism Co. Rico, 478 328, 106 2968, 92 266, distinguished. 420-425. (b) State has failed sustain justifying prohibition. argument justification found interest assuring sufficient grass roots support persuasive, adequately requirement specified obtained. protecting integrity process justify prohibition, because demonstrate necessity burdening communicate order meet concerns. It cannot assumed professional circulator—whose qualifications similar future assignments may well depend reputation competence integrity—is any more accept false than volunteer motivated having proposition ballot. Moreover, provisions dealing expressly with potential danger are adequate minimize risk improper conduct. 425-428. 828 F.2d 1446 (CA10 1987), affirmed. STEVENS, J., delivered opinion unanimous Court. Maurice G. Knaizer, Denver, Colo., appellants. William C. Danks, appellees. Justice STEVENS 1 In new law, or Constitution, have proposal enough period. One section law regulating circulators.1 question this case whether provision unconstitutional. Tenth Circuit, sitting en banc, held abridged therefore Amendments Federal Constitution. We agree. 2 * one several permits citizens place propositions through process. Colo. Const., Art. V, 1; Colo.Rev.Stat. §§ 1-40-101 1-40-119 (1980 Supp.1987). Under measure must submit Legislative Council Drafting Office review comment. draft then submitted three-member title board, prepares title, submission clause, summary. After approval summary, six months amount equal who cast votes all candidates last preceding election. If signature requirements met, petitions filed appear next 1-40-105 3 requires persons circulate approved drafts registered voters. 1(6). Before signed sign affidavits attesting each person whose name purports that, best knowledge belief, signing voter. 1-40-109 (Supp.1987). punished felony. 1-40-110 (1980), n. 1, supra. 4 Appellees Constitution Commission. early 1984 obtained summary proposing began obtaining 46,737 November Based own experience circulators, unpaid concluded time. They action General rights Amendment.2 5 brief trial, Judge entered judgment upholding alternative grounds. he did restraint measurably impair efforts ballot.3 restriction hire them was significant remained free money employ spokesmen could advertise cause. even assuming, arguendo, burdened speech, justified interests making sure sufficiently broad base warrant placement ballot, eliminating temptation pad 6 divided panel affirmed reasons stated granting rehearing however, court reversed. banc majority record demonstrated communication ideas while available pool smaller only volunteers used. 7 "Thus, effect absolute compensation solicitors clear. impedes sponsors' opportunity disseminate views public. curtails normally accompanies And shrinks reached. . short, like campaign expenditure struck down Buckley, imposes direct 'necessarily reduces quantity expression. .' Buckley [v. Valeo ], 424 [1,] 19 [96 612, 634, 46 659 (1976) ]." 1446, 1453-1454 1987)(citations omitted). 8 rejected asserted justifications ban. first suggestion either prevent fraud protect public might too persuasive: 9 "The value-free dependent 'the truth, popularity, social utility beliefs offered.' NAACP Button, [371 415, 445, 83 344, 405 (1963) ]. 'The very purpose foreclose assuming guardianship mind. field every his watchman forefathers trust government separate true us.' Thomas Collins, [323 516, 545 [65 315, 329, 89 L.Ed. 430], (1945) ] (Jackson, concurring)." Id., 1455. 10 needed assure had because, court's view, eligible Finally, advanced dissenting judge no obligation afford procedure, condition use. Having decided confer right, obligated do so manner consistent unlike 266 (1986), involved commercial involves speech." II 11 fully agree Appeals' conclusion limitation scrutiny. Valeo, 45, 96 647, (1976). provides Congress "shall abridging freedom press; people peaceably assemble, Government redress grievances." Colorado. As we explained Thornhill Alabama, 310 88, 95, 60 736, 740, 84 1093 (1940), "[t]he press, secured abridgment United States, among fundamental personal liberties State." Unquestionably, should deregulated societal concern discuss publicly without risking criminal sanctions. press guaranteed embraces liberty truthfully matters previous fear subsequent punishment." 101-102, S.Ct., 744. "was fashioned unfettered interchange bringing about changes desired people." Roth 354 476, 484, 77 1304, 1308, 1498 (1957). seek achieve change Colorado; freely discussions concerning guarded 12 both desire merits change. Although circulator persuade signatories particular prevail capture she deserving scrutiny debate attend consideration whole electorate. This almost involve explanation nature why advocates it.4 Thus, type interactive appropriately described speech."5 13 refusal permit restricts reach.6 Supreme recognized inevitable reducing quantum issue. When called upon consider constitutionality issue here another context Urevich 667 P.2d 760, 763 (1983), expression: 14 "As mentioned previously, statutes initiate legislation closely scrutinized narrowly construed. That acts ACORN's doubted. take judicial notice often difficult get work pay. dissent Conifer Enterprises, Inc., 82 Wash.2d 94, [104,] 508 149 [,155] (1973) (Rosellini, dissenting), observed: 15 " securing small undertaking. Unless find large volunteers, solicit abandon project. I think solicitation work. time-consuming tiresome much seems few young strength, ardor stamina it, unless, course, there some remuneration.' 16 Appellants argue expression, permissible initiative. Neither these arguments persuades us imposed acceptable. 17 outside bounds protection. Colorado's access avenue discourse, communication. leaves "more burdensome" relieve FEC Massachusetts Citizens For Life, 479 238, 107 616, 93 539 (1986). Cf. Against Rent Control Berkeley, 454 290, 296, 299, 102 434, 437, 439, 70 492 (1981). protects advocate cause also select what believe effective doing. 18 Relying contends exercise right. reliance misplaced. "the greater completely casino gambling includes lesser advertising gambling." 345-346, 2979. quite properly pointed out logical flaw attempt draw analogy between present Posadas. decision suggest legislative proposals regarding legalization F.2d, 1456. Thus position And, further "Posadas inapplicable reason—the restricted merely 'commercial "no propose transaction. ." ' Posadas, [478 U.S., 340, 2976] (quoting Virginia Pharmacy Board Consumer Council, 748, 762, 1817, 1825, 48 346 (1976)). Here, contrast, 'at core our electoral freedoms,' 39, 644 Williams Rhodes, 393 23, 32, 5, 11, 21 24 (1968))—an area policy where robust zenith." 1456-1457. 20 trenches importance protections "at reason overcome well-nigh insurmountable. III persuaded correctly held, former unless been 1455.7 22 argued duty verify authenticity provide disregard duty. No evidence offered speculation, prepared assume 23 Other deal tempted signatures. crime forge petition, 1-13-106 misleading statements relating (Supp.1987), someone (1980). Further, top page bear statement printed red ink warning when vote admonishing read understand initiative.8 These seem task minimizing conduct especially corruption, appearance thereof, remote stage time balloting. National Bank Boston Bellotti, 435 765, 790, 98 1407, 1423, 55 707 (1978) ("The corruption perceived cases involving candidate elections simply popular issue"). "[L]egislative restrictions advocacy defeat wholly odds guarantees Amendment." 50, 650. principle applies equally generally passage legislation." 48, 648. prohibiting justify. Its 25 ordered. Rev.Stat. (1980) provides: "Any person, corporation, association directly indirectly pays receives agrees receive thing value inducement referendum commits class shall provided 18-1-105, C.R.S. (1973)." hoped long past, note moot. party suggests Rather, assert controversy capable repetition, yet evading review. over '(1) challenged [is] duration short litigated prior cessation expiration, (2) reasonable expectation same complaining subjected again.' Murphy Hunt, 455 478, 482, 1181, 1183, 71 353 (1982) (per curiam ), quoting Weinstein Bradford, 423 147, 149, 347, 349, 350 (1975) ). satisfied elements case. grants likelihood proponent favorable ruling act slim best. sought enacted. Appellees, continue adoption plan attempts Tr. Oral Arg. 37. Consequently, expect recur parties, evade meaningful See 774-775, 1414-1415, (1978); Moore Ogilvie, 394 814, 1493, (1969). inhibit measures compared prohibit noted 1910, ranked fourth statistic, reject possibility successful available, or, narrowly, success able extra help. noted, indicates [appellees'] purposes enhanced corps augmented cadre workers." 741 1210, 1212 1984) (Appendix). demonstrates speech. Paul Grant, testified conversations effort petition: "[T]he way go soliciting you ask person—first all, interrupt walk whatever You intrude them, "Are voter? "If yes, tell your purpose, circulating qualify November, about, say, 'Please let me know little bit more.' Typically, takes maybe minute two, explaining trying put exempt transportation [State Commission] regulations. "Then petition. hesitate, try come up additional sign. "[We try] explain just deregulation industry, being cartelized, allowing moral choices, price competition lowering costs, estimate prices $150 million year monopoly benefits. tried unfairness injustice existing system, businesses denied into business profits companies. "We individuals start businesses. many cases, asked turned huge corporate organizations opposed them." Record 10-11. testimony example reform falls squarely Our recognition follows Schaumburg Better Environment, 444 620, 826, 63 73 charitable contributions regulate infringe speech: "Prior authorities, clearly establish appeals funds, street door door, variety interests—communication information, dissemination propagation ideas, causes—that Soliciting financial undoubtedly regulation latter undertaken due regard reality characteristically intertwined informative persuasive causes economic, political, issues, flow information cease." 632, 833. Grant resulted "able willing" 19-20. succinctly concluded: "[M]oney enables forego leaving job, job." Ibid. mute those Brief 17. "But concept restrict society enhance relative voice others foreign 48-49, 648-649, succeed getting otherwise said 790-791, 1423-1424, "may influence outcome vote; purpose. But electorate hardly suppress it. '[T]he 648-649. [T]he democracy entrusted responsibility judging evaluating conflicting arguments." Brown Hartlage, 456 60, 1523, 1532, 732 ill-advised choice compelling speech"). Section 1-40-106 part: "(1) At printed, plain letters impression ten-point, boldface type, following: "WARNING "IT IS FELONY: "For anyone her knowingly once elector. "DO NOT SIGN THIS PETITION UNLESS YOU ARE QUALIFIED ELECTOR "TO BE ELECTOR, MUST BE: "(a) eighteen years age. "(b) citizen States. "(c) resident resided thirty-two days. "(d) precinct live "Do referred initiated entirety meaning."

Category: 2