U.S. Supreme Court will hear anti-gay petition signers case in April

[Newsjock]

Source: The Stranger

A case arising over an effort to repeal gay rights will begin its hearing before the federal Supreme Court on April 21, either confirming that petitions signatures should be public or shielding petition signers in anonymity. According to a docket published today, the court will examine whether "the First Amendment right to privacy in political speech, association, and belief requires strict scrutiny when a state compels public release of identifying information about petition signers," and whether "compelled public disclosure of identifying information about petition signers is narrowly tailored to a compelling interest."

Protect Marriage Washington, a group of Christian extremists that gathered signatures to put Referendum 71 on the ballot, is challenging state election rules that require the release of names and addresses of people who sign petitions. The referendum, which qualified for the ballot in summer, put the state's third domestic-partnership law for gay couples and straight seniors up for a public vote. (Voters upheld the law.) State rules mandate that the names of all petition information be released upon request, argued Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna in lower courts.

"We welcome this chance to go to the Supreme Court to defend Washington citizens’ desire for transparency and accountability in our government," Secretary of State Sam Reed wrote in a statement today. "The voters overwhelmingly approved the Public Records Act as part of the sunshine initiative back in 1972, and it has worked very well for four decades. Neither the Legislature nor the people have ever carved out an exemption to block release of petitions. We believe that we can have disclosure and openness, as well as protect our precious First Amendment rights and promote full participation in the initiative process and voting."

Read more: http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2010/02/16/supreme-court-trial-on-r-71-begins-in-april

[Sebastian Doyle]

1. And even though the WA Republican AG and Republican SOS are on the correct side of this one

I'm expecting the usual 5-4 bullshit decision from the Opie Roberts KKKourt. :evilfrown:

[sharesunited]

2. On the basis that voters are anonymous when they vote for or against ballot measures?

Is that the expected reasoning?

Petitioners should enjoy the same freedom from the pressure of public scrutiny, so they can initiate ballot measures according to their conscience?

[midnight]

3. The religious people don't own happiness, joy, marriage or anything else. They

have to learn to share the world with others, and stop fighting...

[gratuitous]

4. Hmmm

So the argument is apparently that states don't have the right to decide their own rules for citizen-initiated ballot measures, a process enumerated nowhere in the Constitution. Looks like a classic 10th Amendment case to me, in that states have the right to decide whether they will or will not allow citizen-initiated ballot measures, and they can promulgate their own rules governing that process.

If the corporatist thugs on the Supreme Court actually believed even a scintilla of the bilge water they spout, this case would be a clear victory for the state of Washington. But because this case turns on one of this Court's favored segments of the population, it's an iffy call.