Buckley v. American Constitutional Law Foundation, Inc.

352 U.S. 182 (1999)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

The complaint in this action was filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983; it challenged six of Colorado's many controls on the initiative petition process. Plaintiffs, now respondents, contend Colorado's law governing initiative petitions violate the First Amendment's freedom of speech guarantee: (1) the requirement that petition circulators be at least 18 years old, (2) the further requirement that they be registered, voters, (3) the limitation of the petition circulation period to six months, § 1-40-108 (4) the requirement that petition circulators wear identification badges stating their names, their status as 'VOLUNTEER' or 'PAID,' and, if the latter, the name and telephone number of their employer, (5) the requirement that circulators attach to each petition section an affidavit containing, inter alia, the circulator's name and address and a statement that 'he or she has read and understands the laws governing the circulation of petitions,' and (6) the requirements that initiative proponents disclose (a) at the time they file their petition, the name, address, and county of voter registration of all paid circulators, the amount of money proponents paid per petition signature, and the total amount paid to each circulator, and (b) on a monthly basis, the names of the proponents, the name and address of each paid circulator, the name of the proposed ballot measure, and the amount of money paid and owed to each circulator during the month. The District Court, after a bench trial, struck down the badge requirement and portions of the disclosure requirements but upheld the age and affidavit requirements and the six-month limit on petition circulation. It also found that the registration requirement 'limits the number of persons available to circulate . . . and, accordingly, restricts core political speech.' Nevertheless, that court upheld the registration requirement. The Court of Appeals affirmed in part and reversed in part. That court properly sought guidance from recent decisions on ballot access, Timmons v. Twin Cities Area New Party, 520 U.S. 351 (1997), and on handbill distribution, McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm'n, 514 U.S. 334 (1995). Initiative petition circulators resemble handbill distributors, in that both seek to promote public support for a particular issue or position. Initiative petition circulators also resemble candidate petition signature gatherers, however, for both seek ballot access. The Tenth Circuit upheld, as reasonable regulations of the ballot initiative process, the age restriction, the six-month limit on petition circulation, and the affidavit requirement. The Court of Appeals struck down the requirement that petition circulators be registered voters and also held portions of the badge and disclosure requirements invalid as trenching unnecessarily and improperly on political expression.