Yes on Term Limits, Inc. v. Savage

Oklahoma’s constitution allowed ballot initiatives. An amendment to the constitution could be placed on the ballot with a petition bearing signatures from 15 percent of the total number of votes cast at the last general election. However, Oklahoma statutes allowed for signatures gathered only by residents to be calculated in that count. Yes on Term Limits, Inc. (YOTL) (plaintiff) was an Oklahoma group attempting to place a ballot initiative regarding term limits for certain public offices in the state. YOTL wished to utilize nonresident petition circulators and filed a suit against Oklahoma Secretary of State Susan Savage (defendant) on grounds that the prohibition against nonresident circulators violated the First Amendment freedom-of-speech rights of YOTL and its members. The trial court found that the impingement of First Amendment rights by the restriction necessitated strict-scrutiny analysis. The trial court found that the government had a compelling interest in protecting the integrity of its elections and that the restriction was narrowly tailored. Evidence was entered in regard to prior misconduct from some nonresident circulators, including one named in the suit as a plaintiff who had previously falsely claimed to be from another state, failed to register in yet another state, and been accused of using bait-and-switch tactics to get signers to sign multiple petitions. Other previous nonresident circulators had falsified their addresses and caused another petition to be invalidated due to widespread fraud. On this basis, the trial court believed that the restriction was sufficiently narrowly tailored to withstand strict scrutiny. However, YOTL presented evidence that non-resident petition circulators actually collected higher percentages of valid signatures than resident volunteers or inexperienced resident workers. Accordingly, YOTL appealed the trial court’s ruling.