Note: Ballotpedia will be read-only from 9pm CST on February 25-March 5 while Judgepedia is merged into Ballotpedia.
For status updates, visit
Ballotpedia's coverage of elections held on March 3, 2015, was limited. Select races were covered live, and all results will be added once the merger is complete.

League of Education Voters v. Washington State

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
League of Education Voters v. Washington State (#87425-5) was a court case about the two-thirds supermajority vote requirement for the Washington State Legislature to raise taxes.

On February 28, 2013, the Washington Supreme Court issued its ruling on League of Educ. Voters v. State and, in doing so, declared legislation requiring a supermajority vote for tax legislation unconstitutional. The challenge was initially filed against Initiative 1053, but is part of a larger issue concerning similar initiatives beginning in 1993 with Initiative 601.

The court found such supermajority requirements to be in violation of Washington Constitution, Article II, Section 22, which states that no bill shall become law unless a majority of each chamber votes in favor of it. The court's ruling concludes with,

Our holding today is not a judgment on the wisdom of requiring a supermajority for the passage of tax legislation. Such judgment is left to the legislative branch of our government. Should the people and the legislature still wish to require a supermajority vote for tax legislation, they must do so through constitutional amendment, not through legislation.


Washington Supreme Court, [2][3]

Washington Supreme Court
Source:Washington Secretary of State's "From our corner" blog

The state's high court ruled 6-3. The majority included Chief Justice Barbara Madsen and Justices Tom Chambers, Mary Fairhurst, Charles Wiggins and Stephen Gonzalez. They noted that "the founders worried about a 'tyranny of the minority' blocking the wishes of the majority." Dissenters included Justices Charles Johnson and James Johnson. They critiqued the majority for getting involved in the "political arena in 'unwise and unprecedented' fashion, misreading the constitution and overriding case law and the clear wishes of the electorate."[4]

See also

Related measures

External links

Additional reading