List of ballot measure lawsuits in 2009
- Binding arbitration in Vallejo, California. Byrne Conley, Jim Libien and J.D. Miller asked a Solano Superior Court judge to put their measure on the ballot. They argue that election officials wrongly disqualified thousands of their petition signatures on pretextual reasons. They also argue in their filing that election officials misled them about the number of signatures they would be required to collect.
- Carson Citizens for Reform v Helen Kawagoe. This appellate decision was about the validity of signatures on a recall petition. The court held that "under the plain language of sections 103 and 11303, a request to withdraw a signature from a recall petition is effective, without regard to whether the voter signs the petition before or after signing the request, as long as the request is filed with the appropriate election official prior to the filing of the petition. We further hold that a voter's request to withdraw his or her signature from a recall petition is not a "petition or paper" that requires the signature of a circulator under section 104. Therefore, the withdrawal requests at issue in this case were valid, and the city clerk's initial certification of the recall petition as insufficient was correct. The recall proponents should not have been found to be successful parties. We reverse the judgment and the order awarding attorney fees as to both the county registrar and the city clerk." The case revolved around the James L. Dear recall, City of Carson, California, 2007.
- Richmond Business License Tax, Measure T (November 2008) was declared unconstitutional in December 2009.
- Vagneur v. City of Aspen. Les Holst, Clifford Weiss, and Terry Paulson said that two initiative petitions proposed in 2007 about open space and the highway entrance to the City of Aspen were invalid because they were about administrative matters, and not legislative matters. According to the city's charter, initiative petitions can only be about legislative matters. Holst, Weiss and Paulson also said that the proposed petitions violated the single-subject rule and that the ballot titles were misleading. A hearing officer upheld the views of Holst, Weiss and Paulson. In 2009, Division III of the Colorado Court of Appeals agreed that the initiative petitions were not proper.
- Clean government amendment case to be heard by Colorado Supreme Court
- Colorado Supreme Court rules on Secret Ballot title challenge
- Florida lawsuit calls for new petition forms
- Florida judges strike signature law, freeing development initiative
- 'Coerced' campaign worker files complaint for pay. Barry Johnson of Chicago said he was forced to collect signatures for Clerk of the Cook County Circuit Court Dorothy Brown as part of his Earnfare job. Johnson said that Brown's campaign field manager, Hasan Muhammad, promised him a dollar a signature to collect signatures for Brown.
- Maine anti-tax group takes Secretary of State to court
- Maine officials approve investigation of same-sex marriage fundraising
- Maine town may overturn ban on political activity
- Maryland may see bill that loosens petition requirements
- Maryland court to rule on petition signature validation process
- Missouri eminent domain ballot title litigation raises concerns about motive
- Group files 7th ballot title lawsuit against Carnahan
- Lawsuits filed against Missouri judicial selection ballot measure
- Light-rail fight goes to Missouri Supreme Court
- Missouri affirmative action initiative faces another ACLU lawsuit
- Missouri court rejects and revises proposed affirmative-action ban
- Nevada Supreme Court rules against Culinary Union
- Nevada legislature enacts new distribution requirements
- In the matter of sentencing Rodriguez and Buck. Rodriguez and Buck committed sexual offenses. They were sentenced to 75 months in prison under the provisions of Oregon Ballot Measure 11 (1994). In 2009, the Oregon Supreme Court reduced that sentence, saying that the sentences were unconstitutionally harsh given the facts in the caes.
- Should signatures on a zoning referendum petition be released to the public under West Virginia's Freedom of Information Act? This lawsuit was filed by a newspaper, the Shepherdstown Observer. The newspaper asked the West Virginia Supreme Court to decide if signatures on a zoning referendum petition should be released under West Virginia's Freedom of Information Act.
- U.S. Supreme Court blocks release of the names of more than 138,000 people in the State of Washington who signed the Washington Referendum 71 (2009) petitions. The name of the court case is John Doe v. Sam Reed.
- Washington proposed bill would make initiative & referendum signatures public
- Court lacks authority to change I-1033 language, says judge
- 2009 ballot measure litigation
- List of ballot measure lawsuits in 2010
- List of ballot measure lawsuits in 1999