Share This Article
Supporters of a proposal to strengthen direct democracy asked the Arkansas Supreme Court Wednesday to order the secretary of state to verify signatures submitted in favor of putting the measure on the November ballot.
The lawsuit asks the court to reverse Secretary of State Cole Jester’s rejection of the petitions for the proposed constitutional amendment, which would prohibit lawmakers from amending or repealing constitutional amendments approved by Arkansans and require voters to approve new laws that affect this process.
Jester, a Republican, last week told the proposed constitutional amendment’s sponsors that 19,924 petition pages submitted to his office had an incorrect ballot name on them.
“We’re asking the Arkansas Supreme Court to let the voters decide this ballot measure, not Secretary Jester,” said Alexander Jones, one of the attorneys representing the seven petitioners in their legal complaint.
At least 90,704 valid signatures from registered voters must be submitted for a proposed constitutional amendment to qualify for the ballot. The ballot question committee Protect AR Rights submitted 95,111 signatures, according to the complaint, but Jester said his office would not count any signatures under a different name than the one Attorney General Tim Griffin approved.
The popular name Griffin’s office certified last year was “The Arkansas Ballot Measure Rights Amendment.” The name attached to the signature pages was “The Ballot Measure Rights Amendment of 2026,” which Jester’s office shared online.
These changes did not create “any material confusion to Petitioners or the other lawful voters who signed petitions in support of” the proposed amendment, the complaint states.
The petitioners argue in the complaint that rejecting all signatures because of non-material changes to the petitions infringes on Arkansans’ right to amend the state’s constitution.
“Secretary Jester’s erroneous decision that the petition is insufficient has stifled Petitioners’ voices and limited their rights to express themselves,” the complaint states.
Protect AR Rights submitted petitions to Jester’s office on the July 3 deadline. Jester told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette that his office immediately found a problem with the popular name circulated on the petitions. The state constitution requires the secretary of state to notify ballot question committees “without delay” if there is a problem with the petitions.
Additionally, a bipartisan 2025 law dictates that the secretary of state cannot determine signatures are insufficient because of a “failure of form,” the complaint states.
Griffin’s office will represent Jester in the case before the Supreme Court. The attorney general maintains that Jester’s rejection of the petitions “was proper and in accordance with Arkansas law,” Griffin spokesperson Jeff LeMaster said Wednesday.
Jester spokesperson Samantha Boyd didn’t comment directly on the lawsuit but defended Arkansas’ elections as the most “free and fair” in the nation “because we focus on integrity and the rule of law.”
The petitioners asked the Supreme Court to direct Jester “to employ the least restrictive means available” to address “any non-material or insubstantial non-compliance on the face of the petitions.”
State law allows a 30-day cure period if a ballot question committee’s initial submission contains valid signatures equal to at least 75% of the overall required number of signatures and 75% of the required number from at least 15 counties. The petitioners asked the Supreme Court to order Jester’s office to allow the 30-day cure period if needed.
This is the second time in just over two years that supporters of proposed constitutional amendments have asked the Supreme Court to overrule the secretary of state’s rejection of petition signatures. The high court in 2024 upheld then-Secretary of State John Thurston’s rejection of petitions submitted for an abortion rights ballot measure.
Arkansas’ Supreme Court is nonpartisan, but Republican-linked justices hold five of the seven seats on the court.
Arkansas Advocate is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arkansas Advocate maintains editorial independence. This article was published with permission from the Arkansas Advocate. Contact Editor Andrew DeMillo for questions: [email protected]. Follow Arkansas Advocate on Facebook and Twitter.
