In a challenge of a proposed constitutional amendment that was placed on the November general election ballot by lawmakers in May, Cole County Circuit Judge Cotton Walker ruled that the official written description of the issue facing voters is “fair and sufficient.”
“(T)he court concludes that the summary statement is not untrue or prejudicial, and it does not use language that is intentionally argumentative or likely to create prejudice for the measure ...,” Walker wrote in his 11-page decision.
Monday’s ruling came in response to two St. Louis residents who alleged in a civil lawsuit that the initiative approved by the Republican-controlled House and Senate earlier this year is flawed and should be corrected.
“The erroneous and biased summary statement and fair ballot language should be vacated and replaced with correct language that provides voters with true and impartial information about the amendment,” Liz de Laperouse and Eric Bronner said in the July lawsuit.
An appeal may be coming. Attorney Charles Hatfield, who is representing the two, said most cases concerning ballot initiatives are decided at the appellate level.
The proposed constitutional change is the latest in a wave of red states seeking to prohibit the alternative vote counting method. Oklahoma, Kentucky, Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi earlier this year enacted laws barring the practice, calling it confusing and nontraditional.
Instead of a winner-take-all approach, ranked choice allows voters to rank candidates in order of preference. A candidate wins outright if they receive a majority of the first-place votes.
If not, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and voters who chose that candidate have their votes redistributed to the candidate they ranked second on their ballots. The process continues until a candidate has secured a majority of the vote.
Supporters of the concept say it could limit the rise of extremist candidates who win because more moderate voters divide the centrist vote.
The measure exempts nonpartisan elections in St. Louis, which instituted an “approval voting” system first used in the 2021 municipal elections.
Under the St. Louis system, voters are allowed to vote for as many candidates as they approve of, and the top two-candidates advance to a run-off election.
The lawsuit took issue with the ballot summary, which claims the proposal would make the state constitution consistent with state law by only allowing citizens of the United States to vote.
During lengthy debate during the spring legislative session, Democrats contended the citizenship language was added by Republicans as so-called ballot candy to trick voters into approving it as part of their push to make immigration a major issue in the election.
In his decision, Walker appeared to scold Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft, House Speaker Dean Plocher and Senate President Caleb Rowden after their attorneys could not provide a “definitive answer” about whether noncitizens are already barred from voting, as per state statute.
Hatfield said that could be a key point raised during an appeal.
“They wouldn’t answer that question,” Hatfield said.
But Walker, in the ruling, said the language is clear enough.
“The court does not believe that a reasonable voter will be misled or deceived into what the measure will do ...,” the judge wrote.
©2024 STLtoday.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
