Knudsen
HELENA, Mont. – A ballot initiative designed to keep corporations from spending on elections in Montana is a little too ambitious, the state Supreme Court has found.
The new proposals included in Ballot Issue 4 violate the rules for wording such initiatives, the court ruled yesterday. State Attorney General Austin Knudsen made that argument to the justices over a vote that would have corporations labeled by the State as “artificial persons.”
The initiative would have said the people of Montana never intended to allow artificial persons to take part in election activity. But it contained other measures, the court ruled, that would leave voters taking on too much – rejecting the idea they were so closely related that voters were deciding essentially a single topic.
“Although BI-4 does not combine unrelated amendments in an attempt to secure support from different groups, it would force voters who support abolishing corporate spending ‘on elections or ballot issues’ to also support, more broadly: 1) limiting the rights of other entities defined as “artificial persons,” such as unincorporated associations and cooperatives; and 2) potentially limiting the powers of such organizations to engage in activities other than election and ballot issue activities in significant but unspecified other ways,” Justice Jim Rice wrote.
Voters must be allowed to express their opinion on each proposed amendment, Rice continued. It’s a loss for Transparent Election Initiative, a group dedicated to fighting against the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which held that corporate spending on political issues is protected under the First Amendment.
The initiative was called its “Montana Plan” – a first-of-its-kind effort to keep “secret-donor money” out of the state’s elections. It didn’t overturn Citizens United, TEI said, it makes it irrelevant.
“It redefines Montana’s corporations as entities that no longer have the power to spend in politics,” the group said. “And if an entity wasn’t given the power to do something by its creator, whether it has a right to do that thing is irrelevant.”
Groups like the Montana Mining Association and the Montana Chamber of Commerce resisted the initiative. MMA said states cannot use semantics to get around the First Amendment and BI-4 was not tailored to a governmental interest.
The Montana Chamber noted BI-4 if passed would be the longest section in the Montana Constitution by triple.
“BI-4 extends it extreme speech restrictions beyond business corporations and nonprofits by including even ‘unincorporated associations,’” the chamber wrote.
“An ‘unincorporated association’ includes just about any association of two or more people – everything from churches and grassroots protest movements to informal social media groups and living-room discussion groups.
“Even so, BI-4 subjects them to absolute prohibitions on political speech, which implicates their rights to free association and free speech.”
