Nebraska Death Penalty Repeal, Referendum 426 (2016)

Nebraska Death Penalty Repeal, Referendum 426
Election date November 8, 2016
Topic Death penalty
Status d Defeated
Type Referendum	Origin Citizens

2016 measures
November 8
Referendum 426 d
Polls
Voter guides
Campaign finance
Signature costs

The Nebraska Death Penalty Repeal Veto Referendum, also known as Referendum 426, was on the November 8, 2016, ballot in Nebraska as a veto referendum. The measure asked voters whether they wanted to repeal or maintain a law that eliminated the death penalty in Nebraska. Voters defeated the measure, thereby repealing the death penalty ban implemented by LB 268 and reinstating the death penalty in the state of Nebraska.

A "retain" vote for the measure supported retaining LB 268 and upholding the ban on the death penalty.

A "repeal" vote for the measure supported reinstating the death penalty in the state by repealing Legislative Bill (LB) 268, a law that banned the death penalty.

Supporters of a "repeal" vote wanted to repeal LB 268, the legislation passed in May 2015 that banned the death penalty in the state. Supporters of a "retain" vote wanted to maintain the law, which changed the maximum penalty for first degree murder to life in prison.

LB 268 was passed by the Nebraska State Senate on May 27, 2015, overriding a veto from Gov. Pete Ricketts (R).

Aftermath

On December 4, 2017, the ACLU of Nebraska filed a lawsuit in the Nebraska District 3 Court to prevent the execution of inmates on the state’s death row, arguing that Referendum 426 should be ruled void. According to the ACLU of Nebraska, Gov. Pete Ricketts (R) "proposed, initiated, funded, organized, operated, and controlled" the petition drive for the veto referendum, lent government staff to the campaign, and, along with his parents Joe and Marlene Ricketts, provided 29 percent of the campaign's funds. The organization argued that these actions violated the state constitution's separation of powers clause because Gov. Ricketts was treating himself as the legislative branch through his actions to reverse the state legislature's override of his veto of Legislative Bill 268. The ACLU of Nebraska also said that the state constitution reserves the referendum as a legislative power of the people, not the governor.

Danielle Conrad, director of the ACLU of Nebraska, stated, "In Nebraska, our state Constitution ... establishes a strong tradition with a clear separation of powers. The governor can’t have it both ways and serve both as a member of the executive and legislative branches." Amy Miller, the group's legal director, added, "It’s our position that when the legislature overrode his veto, that was the limit of what the governor could do to influence state law."

Taylor Gage, a spokesperson to Gov. Ricketts, responded, saying, "The Governor's Office holds itself to a high standard and follows state law regarding the use of taxpayer resources. This liberal advocacy group has repeatedly worked to overturn the clear voice of the Nebraska people on the issue of capital punishment and waste taxpayer dollars with frivolous litigation. The administration remains committed to protecting public safety and creating a safe environment for our Corrections officers."

On December 15, 2017, the attorney general's office asked for the lawsuit to be dismissed. Assistant Attorney General Ryan Post said that plaintiffs had a "flawed interpretations of Nebraska law" and that "merely advocating in favor of a referendum does not exercise legislative power."

On February 13, 2018, Judge John Colborn dismissed the case.

Election results

Nebraska Referendum 426
Result		Votes	Percentage
d Retain		320,719	39.36%
a Repeal		494,151	60.64%

Election results from Nebraska Secretary of State

Text of Measure

Ballot summary

In a letter from the attorney general of Nebraska on September 11, 2015, the office prepared an explanatory statement to directly precede the ballot title on the ballot.

“

A vote to 'Retain' will eliminate the death penalty and change the maximum penalty for the crime of murder in the first degree to life imprisonment by retaining Legislative Bill 268, passed in 2015 by the First Session of the 104th Nebraska Legislature. A vote to 'Repeal' will keep the death penalty as a possible penalty for the crime of murder in the first degree by repealing Legislative Bill 268, passed in 2015 by the First Session of the 104th Nebraska Legislature.

”

Ballot title

The ballot title was as follows:

“

The purpose of Legislative Bill 268, passed by the First Session of the 104th Nebraska Legislature in 2015, is to eliminate the death penalty and change the maximum penalty for the crime of murder in the first degree to life imprisonment. Shall Legislative Bill 268 be repealed?

”

Full text

The full text of the measure can be read here.

Noteworthy events

Public service announcements

On October 26, 2016, Nebraska Secretary of State John Gale decided to take two radio public service announcements, one 30 second spot and one 60 second spot, that explained Nebraska Referendum 426 off the air after receiving criticism from death penalty opponents. Retain a Just Nebraska, the group supporting the “retain” vote for the referendum, originally reached out to the Nebraska Broadcasters Association and requested that the radio spots be taken off the air, but the association declined to honor the request at first. Retain a Just Nebraska claimed that the spots were inaccurate because they did not describe the effects of a “retain” vote completely, only saying that it would abolish the death penalty without including that the maximum penalty for first-degree murder would be life in prison if a “retain” vote passed. Gale said that he withdrew the ads so that voters could continue to focus on the "substantive issues" regarding the measure.

PSA media editorials

The Lincoln Journal Star wrote the following regarding Secretary of State John Gale's decision to pull the public service announcements:

“

Nebraska Secretary of State John Gale was right to pull public service announcements that were scheduled to air on the death penalty referendum. The radio ads were aimed at a real problem, but they were the wrong solution. The problem is the confusing language that appears on the ballot. To reiterate, votes who support the death penalty will vote to repeal. Voters who oppose the death penalty will vote to retain the law passed by the Legislature, which replaces the death penalty with a sentence of life in prison. The radio ads tried to oversimply the situation, and the end result was that they were misleading. The announcements made it sound as though the choice was solely to keep or abolish the death penalty without reference to the fact that the law in question replaced the death penalty with life in prison.

”

Background

Legislative Bill 268

In 2015, the Nebraska State Senate passed LB 268 to eliminate capital punishment in Nebraska. Gov. Pete Ricketts (R) vetoed the bill on May 26, 2015, sending LB 268 back to the legislature with a letter explaining his reasoning. He argued, "Your decision will determine whether the families of victims of 10 murderers on Nebraska’s death row will ever receive the justice they deserve which was meted out by a very deliberate and cautious judicial process in each of their cases. Your decision tests the true meaning of representative government."

At least 30 senators voting against the bill were expected to vote to overturn the veto, so Ricketts traveled the state to urge senators to uphold it. The Senate brought LB 268 to a vote on May 27, 2015, and the veto was overturned by a 30-to-19 vote. Nebraska law requires a minimum of 30 votes to overturn vetoes, so the veto was narrowly overturned by only one vote. Nebraska became the 19th state to eliminate the death penalty.

The following senators voted in favor of overturning the governor's veto and passing the bill to eliminate the death penalty. Fifteen of the senators were Republican, 13 were Democrat, one was Independent, and one was Libertarian.

• Roy Baker (R-30)
• Kate Bolz (D-29)
• Kathy Campbell (R-25)
• Ernie Chambers (I-11)
• Colby Coash (R-27)
• Tanya Cook (D-13)

• Sue Crawford (D-45)
• Al Davis (R-43)
• Laura Ebke (L-32)
• Tommy Garrett (R-3)
• Mike Gloor (R-35)
• Ken Haar (D-21)

• Galen Hadley (R-37)
• Matt Hansen (D-26)
• Burke Harr (D-8)
• Robert Hilkemann (R-4)
• Sara Howard (D-9)
• Rick Kolowski (D-31)

• Mark Kolterman (R-24)
• Bob Krist (R-10)
• Brett Lindstrom (R-18)
• John McCollister (R-20)
• Heath Mello (D-5)
• Adam Morfeld (D-46)

• Jeremy Nordquist (D-7)
• Patty Pansing Brooks (D-28)
• Paul Schumacher (R-22)
• Les Seiler (R-33)
• Kate Sullivan (D-41)
• Matt Williams (R-36)

The following senators voted against overturning the governor's veto to prevent the bill eliminating the death penalty from passing. All 19 senators voting "no" were Republicans.

• Dave Bloomfield (R-17)
• Lydia Brasch (R-16)
• Joni Craighead (R-6)
• Curt Friesen (R-34)

• Mike Groene (R-42)
• Dan Hughes (R-44)
• Jerry Johnson (R-23)
• Bill Kintner (R-2)

• John Kuehn (R-38)
• Tyson Larson (R-40)
• Beau McCoy (R-39)
• John Murante (R-49)

• Merv Riepe (R-12)
• Jim Scheer (R-19)
• Ken Schilz (R-47)
• David Schnoor (R-15)

• Jim Smith (R-14)
• John Stinner (R-48)
• Dan Watermeier (R-1)

The original vote for LB 268 prior to the veto had 32 votes in favor; Sens. Jerry Johnson (R-23) and John Murante (R-49) changed their votes to a "no" vote to oppose the passage of LB 268 following the governor's veto.

Nebraska trifecta

See also State government trifectas, Gubernatorial and legislative party control of state government, and Nebraska State Senate partisan affiliation

Nebraska's legislature is unique in that it is a unicameral body, and therefore consists of only a senate. All senators and candidates are listed officially as nonpartisan, however, most individuals do have a party affiliation. In 2016, Ballotpedia determined that 36 of the 49 senators in Nebraska identified as Republican, giving them partisan control over the state legislature. In combination with the Republican governor, Pete Ricketts, this makes Nebraska a Republican-controlled trifecta state.

In the case of LB 268, the Republican-controlled legislature passed a ban on the death penalty and voted again to override the Republican governor's veto. Following the override vote, several Republican officials have joined both the "repeal" and "retain" campaigns of Referendum 426. Typically, having a trifecta increases the chances of a particular party to successfully pass legislation.

States with the death penalty

Before the November 2016 election, capital punishment was legal in 31 states. It was illegal in 19 states plus the District of Columbia. Colorado, Pennsylvania, Oregon, and Washington featured laws allowing the death penalty but had governor-imposed moratoriums in place. The Nebraska legislature had passed a bill abolishing the death penalty but the bill was defeated by a veto referendum petition. After the November 2016 election, voters did not change the legal status of the death penalty in any of the states with measures on the issue.

In 1846, Michigan became the first state to abolish the death penalty. Between 1846 and 1911, four states banned the practice. For the 46 years following Minnesota's 1911 repeal of capital punishment, no other states followed suit. Then, between 1957 and 1965, five additional states abolished the death penalty. During the 1970s and early 1980s, four more states decided against it. Another lull lasted until 2007 when both New Jersey and New York prohibited the death penalty. Seven states abolished the death penalty between 2007 and 2017. Although the Nebraska legislature voted to abolish the death penalty in 2015, the bill did not go into effect. In August 2016, the Delaware Supreme Court struck down the death penalty as unconstitutional.

In the November 2016 election, voters in three states showed support for the death penalty. Voters in California rejected Proposition 62, which would have repealed the state's death penalty, and they narrowly approved a measure designed to speed up the death row appeal process. The people of Nebraska voted repeal on Referendum 426, thereby preserving the death penalty by voting against the legislature's 2015 motion to abolish capital punishment. Voters in Oklahoma, where the death penalty was already legal, approved State Question 776, which constitutionalized capital punishment.

Other state ballot measures

Californians had the opportunity to vote on a repeal of the death penalty in November 2016, with an initiated state statute known as Proposition 62. It was defeated. Similar to the Nebraska referendum, it was designed to replace the death penalty with life in prison without parole as the maximum sentence for murder.

Voters in Oklahoma also voted on a death penalty measure in November 2016. It was approved. This legislatively referred constitutional amendment was designed to forbid the death penalty from being construed as cruel or unusual punishment and to assert that all methods of execution are constitutional, unless prohibited by the United States Constitution.

Availability of lethal injection drugs

Lethal injection was first adopted as the main means of execution in Oklahoma in 1977 and is now the method used by all 31 states where the death penalty is legal. Nebraska was one of the last states to make the switch from electrocution to lethal injection in 2008, when the state supreme court ruled electrocution as unconstitutional.

In May 2016, pharmaceutical giant Pfizer joined several other drug manufacturing companies in prohibiting the use of their drugs for executions. As a result, drugs used in executions are no longer available through the "normal pharmaceutical market," which has made it increasingly difficult for states to carry out death penalty sentences. This difficulty has become apparent in Nebraska, where Gov. Ricketts has struggled to acquire the necessary drugs. In November 2011, the state purchased samples of one of the drugs needed for lethal injection from a distributor in India, HarrisPharma; however, the Swiss manufacturer that provided the drugs to HarrisPharma asked them to be returned, as they did not intend for the drug to be used in executions. In May 2015, Gov. Ricketts announced that he had once again used HarrisPharma to obtain two of the drugs used in executions, allowing the state to be able to carry out lethal injections. After the state paid HarrisPharma more than $54,000 for the drugs, the FDA said it is illegal for states to import one of the drugs, sodium thiopental. As of March 2016, HarrisPharma refused to refund $26,700 for the sodium thiopental, claiming it is not the fault of the company that the drugs cannot be imported.

Support for "repeal" vote

Supporters

The campaign to repeal the law was led by Nebraskans for the Death Penalty.

Treasurer Don Stenberg (R) and Sen. Beau McCoy (R-39) served as co-chairs for the group. Board members included Omaha City Council member Aimee Melton, former State Board of Education member Bob Evnen, and Nebraska Republican Party Third District Vice Chair Judy Glassburner. Evnen said the group was seeking a referendum because “this is a decision of very great importance and consequence to the state. I feel that the people of the state ought to be allowed to have their voice heard on it."

Gov. Pete Ricketts (R), talking about his involvement in the campaign, stated, "I’m confident Nebraska voters will restore the death penalty in Nebraska."

Officials

• Gov. Pete Ricketts (R)
• Treasurer Don Stenberg (R)
• Sen. Beau McCoy (R-39)
• Mayor of Omaha Jean Stothert (NP)
• Sen. Mike Groene (R-42)
• Hal Daub, University of Nebraska Regent
• Aimee Melton, Omaha City Councilwoman
• Bob Evnen, Former State Board of Education member
• Judy Glassburner, 3rd District Vice Chair, Nebraska Republican Party
• Rob Schafer, University of Nebraska Regent

Organizations

• Police Officers' Association of Nebraska
• Nebraska Sheriffs Association
• Nebraska County Attorneys Association

Arguments for "Repeal" vote

Shawn Hebbert, sheriff of Grant County and president of the Nebraska Sheriffs Association, claimed capital punishment is a deterrent that protects corrections officers. He stated:

“

It’s important because of the public safety issue. It’s also important because, as sheriffs in charge of local jails, it protects our corrections people. The death penalty works as a deterrent to protect our guards and our people who work in corrections, as well as our deputies, because that currently is an enhanceable penalty.

”

Rod Edwards, state field director for Nebraskans for the Death Penalty, said,

“

We think that the death penalty is an appropriate punishment for heinous murderers and we are going to do anything we can to make sure Nebraskans understand that and go out and vote in November.

”

Support for "retain" vote

The campaign that supported retaining the law that eliminated the death penalty (i.e., those against the death penalty) was led by Retain a Just Nebraska, which was formerly known as Nebraskans for Public Safety.

Officials

• Sen. Colby Coash (R-27)
• Sen. Adam Morfeld (D-46)
• Former Judge Ronald Reagan
• Bryan Baumgart, former chair of the Douglas County Republicans

Organizations

A Retain a Just Nebraska advertisement encouraging voters to retain the law

• Nebraskans for Alternatives to the Death Penalty
• Nebraska Innocence Project
• ACLU of Nebraska
• Nebraska Criminal Defense Attorneys Association
• Proteus Action League
• Nebraska Catholic Conference
• Our Revolution

Individuals

• Reverend Lauren Ekdahl
• Reverend Bill Thornton

Arguments in favor of "Retain" vote

Sen. Colby Coash said,

“

If this bill is overturned, executions do not resume. The death penalty remains a broken system.

”

Judge Ronald Reagan, who retired in 2005 from the Sarpy County District Court, served on a panel that sentenced serial killer John Joubert to death. He said,

“

As a retired district judge and a fiscal conservative, I know firsthand the death penalty is broken and beyond repair. It is, quite simply, a state-sanctioned revenge which has no deterrent effect and no place in a civilized society. Keeping it in Nebraska law will not lower the murder rate nor furnish any protection to our law officers. Those who commit murders give no thought to either apprehension or punishment and removing them from free society with the least expense -- life imprisonment -- is the appropriate sentence.

”

A Nebraskans for Public Safety advertisement encouraging voters to not sign petitions supporting the referendum

Bryan Baumgart, who served as chair of the Douglas County Republicans, said,

“

Many Nebraskans are appalled by efforts to undo the conservative-backed repeal of the death penalty. The death penalty is a powerful example of a failed government program that we have nothing to show for. Despite spending millions on its maintenance, we haven’t had any executions in almost 20 years. I stand with the 16 Conservative Nebraskan Senators who recognized that the death penalty is a violation of our cherished pro-life beliefs, and commitment to fiscal restraint, and limited government.

”

Tracy Hightower-Henne, executive director of the Nebraska Innocence Project, argued:

“

The risk of executing an innocent person is too high to have the death penalty on the books. To date, we have seen over 150 people exonerated and released from death row because they were actually innocent. In Nebraska, we have two men on death row who have pending innocence claims. Nebraska should be proud that with the repeal of the death penalty, we no longer have to worry about the risk of executing an innocent person.

”

Campaign finance

Total campaign contributions as of January 17, 2017
Support:	$1,363,673.00
Opposition:	$859,814.11

Support for "repeal"

Nebraskans for the Death Penalty raised $950,133 in 2015, and an additional $413,540 in 2016, according to the most recent campaign finance report, which was filed on October 24, 2016. The group spent $940,192 in 2015 and an additional $415,983.47 in 2016 as of October 24, 2016. Of the $950,133 in contributions, $16,740 were made as in-kind contributions. Gov. Ricketts donated $300,000 to the group, and his father gave another $100,000.

The following ballot question committee registered to support a "repeal" vote on Referendum 426 as of December 2016. The chart below shows cash donations and expenditures current as of the most recent campaign finance reports filed on October 24, 2016.

Committee	Amount raised	Amount spent
Nebraskans for the Death Penalty Inc	$1,363,673.00	$1,356,175.47
Total	$1,363,673.00	$1,356,175.47

Top donors

As of January 17, 2017, the following were the top five donors in support of a "repeal" vote on this referendum:

Donor	Amount
Judicial Crisis Network	$400,000
Pete Ricketts	$300,000
Joe Ricketts	$100,000
Robert Mercer	$100,000
Citizens for a Sound Government	$85,000

Support for "retain"

Nebraskans for Public Safety raised $750,190 in 2015 and an additional $109,624.11 in 2016, according to the most recent campaign finance report, which was filed on October 24, 2016. The group also spent $737,031 in 2015 and an additional 93,611.66 in 2016 as of October 24, 2016. Of the $859,814.11 in contributions, $107,155.11 were made as in-kind contributions. The Proteus Action League of Amherst, Massachusetts, donated $598,495 to the group.

The following ballot question committee registered to support a "retain" vote on Referendum 426 as of October 2016. The chart below shows cash donations and expenditures current as of the most recent campaign finance reports filed on October 24, 2016.

Committee	Amount raised	Amount spent
Nebraskans for Public Safety	$859,814.11	$830,642.66
Total	$859,814.11	$830,642.66

Top donors

As of January 17, 2017, the following were the top five donors in support of a "retain" vote on this referendum:

Donor	Cash	In-kind	Total
Proteus Action League	$598,495	$0.00	$598,495.00
Equal Justice USA	$0.00	$68,968.51	$68,968.51
Paul and Annette Smith	$50,000.00	$0.00	$50,000.00
Nebraskans for Alternatives to the Death Penalty	$10,000	$10,279.44	$20,279.44
Richard Holland	$20,000.00	$0.00	$20,000.00

Polls

Nebraska Referendum 426
Poll	Retain	Repeal	Undecided	Margin of Error	Sample Size
Global Marketing Research Services 8/7/2016 - 8/10/2016	30.3%	58.3%	11.3%	+/-4.0	600
Note: A "0%" finding means the candidate was not a part of the poll. The polls above may not reflect all polls that have been conducted in this race. Those displayed are a random sampling chosen by Ballotpedia staff. If you would like to nominate another poll for inclusion in the table, send an email to editor@ballotpedia.org.

A poll conducted by Prism Surveys on behalf of the ACLU of Nebraska in March 2015 showed that 58.5 percent of Nebraska voters support alternatives to the death penalty, while 30 percent support the death penalty over alternatives. The poll surveyed 2,129 Nebraskans and had a margin of error of 2.12 percent.

Media editorials

Support for "retain" vote

• The Lincoln Journal Star said the following:

“

But surely if Nebraska voters seriously look at the death penalty, they will realize that the system is too capable of error to be put back on the books. Elaborate attempts to rid the death penalty of error have succeeded only in layering on endless rounds of appeals and in wasting more tax dollars. Vote against the death penalty referendum.

”

Other

• McCook Gazette did not advocate for a specific position; however, the editorial board did agree that the issue should be placed on the ballot. The board said, “If you haven't already formed an opinion on capital punishment, you should have plenty of opportunity in the coming months. Is the death penalty a real deterrent? Is the death penalty an appropriate means of administering justice? Should Nebraska abandon the death penalty just because it has difficulty carrying it out? They're all profound questions and it's appropriate that voters have a say in providing the answers.”

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in Nebraska

Nebraska's signature requirement for ballot initiatives is unique among the states. The number of required signatures is tied to the number of registered voters in the state as of the deadline for filing signatures. For veto referendums, the number of signatures required is equivalent to at least 5 percent of registered voters at the time of the deadline—56,708 for this referendum. Signatures for veto referendums must be submitted to the Nebraska secretary of state within 90 days of the adjournment of the legislative session. Since the 2015 legislative session adjourned on May 29, 2015, signatures for this referendum were due on August 27, 2015.

The Nebraska secretary of state certified the form and wording of the referendum petition on June 5, 2015, thus allowing petitioners to start collecting signatures. Supporters started their drive the following day—June 6, 2015—and submitted 166,692 signatures to the state on August 26, 2015.

Secretary of State John Gale announced on October 16, 2015, that more than 143,000 signatures had been verified and Referendum 426 was approved for the 2016 ballot. Petitioners also successfully collected signatures from at least 10 percent of registered voters—113, 883 signatures—to suspend LB 268 from taking effect before voters decide on the referendum in 2016.

Cost of signature collection:
Sponsors of the measure hired Lincoln Strategy Group to collect signatures for the petition to qualify this measure for the ballot. A total of $597,144.25 was spent to collect the 113,883 valid signatures required to put this measure before voters, resulting in a total cost per required signature (CPRS) of $5.24. If petitioners had only collected the 56,708 signatures to place the referendum on the ballot, and not the 113,883 to also suspend the law until the election, but expended the same amount of money, the CPRS would have been $10.53.

Lawsuits

Lawsuits overview
First lawsuit
Issue: Omission of a petition sponsor
Court: Filed in Nebraska Third District Court; appealed to Nebraska Supreme Court
Ruling: Rejected; ruled in favor of defendants, allowing the referendum to appear on the ballot
Plaintiff(s): Christy and Richard Hargesheimer, on behalf of Nebraskans for Public Safety	Defendant(s): Nebraska Secretary of State John Gale, Nebraskans for the Death Penalty, Judy Glasburner, Aimee Melton, and Bob Evnen
Plaintiff argument: Plaintiffs argued that the referendum was invalid because the petition failed to list Governor Ricketts, who they believed was an initiating force behind the petition, as a sponsor.	Defendant argument: The defendant argued that support of a petition does not necessarily make a person a sponsor of a petition.
Second lawsuit
Issue: Misleading ballot language
Court: Nebraska Third District Court
Ruling: Rejected; ruled in favor of defendants, allowing the referendum to appear on the ballot
Plaintiff(s): Lyle Koenig, on behalf of Nebraskans for Public Safety	Defendant(s): Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson and Nebraska Secretary of State John Gale
Plaintiff arguments: Plaintiffs argued that the ballot measure language was misleading because it said the maximum sentence for first-degree murder was life in prison, while the group noted that life imprisonment would be the only penalty permitted for first-degree murder.	Defendant arguments: The defendant argued the ballot text was taken directly from language drafted by the legislature’s Judiciary Committee.

Against referendum's sponsor list

On September 17, 2015, Nebraskans for Public Safety filed a lawsuit challenging the validity of Referendum 426. The group claimed that the petition failed to list Gov. Pete Ricketts as a sponsor, while they asserted "on information and belief" the governor was a primary initiating force behind the referendum. Plaintiffs argued the omission was not only a violation of state law, but could affect a registered voter's decision whether to sign the petition.

“	Knowledge by potential petition signers about the true and actual sponsors of a Referendum can be and is a material influence on their decision whether to sign or not sign a petition. Some Nebraska registered voters might be influenced favorably toward signing by learning that their state Governor is the real sponsor, early instigator, organizer, decision maker, selector of the manager and other workers for the drive, financier, and, in effect, 'boss' of a petition drive. However, other registered voters may be put off by such a disclosure of the primary sponsor as the very Governor whose veto was just overridden by the duly elected Legislature, and they may be influenced in the opposite way, that is, toward declining to sign.	”
—Nebraskans for Public Safety, the plaintiffs

The advocacy group detailed why they believed the governor was heavily involved in the petition, including the following observations:

• Ricketts' close allies became involved in the referendum campaign.
• The governor sent out letters using his title as governor to encourage donations to the campaign in summer 2015. He also solicited contributions from other political, business, and social allies as well.
• Ricketts and his father became the largest donors to the referendum campaign.

Plaintiffs said Ricketts already had his opportunity to defeat the repeal by using his gubernatorial powers to veto the law, but the legislature decided to overturn the veto, thus demonstrating the checks and balances of state government.

On January 29, 2016, Lancaster County District Judge Lori Maret rejected the lawsuit, stating that the arguments of the suit were "predicated on an erroneous interpretation" of state law.

Appeal

The plaintiffs filed an appeal with the Nebraska Supreme Court, where oral arguments were heard on May 25, 2016. The arguments center around determining who qualifies as a "sponsor" of a measure in Nebraska, although the plaintiffs brought up additional concerns about the sworn list of sponsors, stating that measure proponents submitted a notarized sheet rather than a sworn statement. On July 8, 2016, the Supreme Court upheld Judge Maret's ruling, stating in a unanimous decision that financial supporters of a petition drive are not the same as sponsors. The Supreme Court did not consider the question of the sworn statement because it was not brought up in the original suit with the Lancaster County District Court.

Against ballot language

Nebraskans for Public Safety also claimed that the ballot language was misleading because the text said the maximum sentence allowed in first-degree murder cases was life in prison, while the group noted that life imprisonment would be the only penalty permitted for first-degree murder. Attorney General Doug Peterson argued in his Lancaster County District Court filing that the ballot text was taken directly from language drafted by the legislature’s Judiciary Committee. Judge Maret heard arguments for the suit in mid May, and rejected the suit on June 23, 2016. Judge Maret stated that the ballot language was consistent with language used in the abolition of capital punishment. If the court had ruled in favor of Nebraskans for Public Safety, the ballot language would have been changed.

State profile

This excerpt is reprinted here with the permission of the 2016 edition of the Almanac of American Politics and is up to date as of the publication date of that edition. All text is reproduced verbatim, though links have been added by Ballotpedia staff. To read the full chapter on Nebraska, click here.

Nebraska – America's top beef exporter and fifth-biggest agricultural exporter overall – has long been, and remains, one of the most Republican states in the nation. But Nebraska's largest and fastest-growing metropolitan area, Omaha, is politically marginal and, thanks to the state's eccentric Electoral College rules, it gave one of its five electoral votes to Barack Obama in 2008 and came within two percentage points of doing so again for Hillary Clinton in 2016, even as Donald Trump was winning the state with 60 percent of the vote.

The first travelers on the Oregon Trail in the 1840s called what they saw when they crossed the Missouri River and moved west along the Platte River "the sea of Nebraska." The state's ruggedly beautiful sandhills, a blanket of grass tucked roughly over submerged sand dunes, bloom atop the Ogalalla Aquifer and cover about a quarter of the state. In Nebraska, you can see nothing but rolling fields for miles on end, sectioned off here and there by ...(read more)

Demographic data for Nebraska
	Nebraska	U.S.
Total population:	1,893,765	316,515,021
Land area (sq mi):	76,824	3,531,905
Gender
Female:	50.3%	50.8%
Race and ethnicity**
White:	88.1%	73.6%
Black/African American:	4.7%	12.6%
Asian:	2%	5.1%
Native American:	0.9%	0.8%
Pacific Islander:	0.1%	0.2%
Two or more:	2.2%	3%
Hispanic/Latino:	10%	17.1%
Education
High school graduation rate:	90.7%	86.7%
College graduation rate:	29.3%	29.8%
Income
Median household income:	$52,997	$53,889
Persons below poverty level:	14.6%	11.3%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, "American Community Survey" (5-year estimates 2010-2015) **Note: Percentages for race and ethnicity may add up to more than 100 percent because respondents may report more than one race and the Hispanic/Latino ethnicity may be selected in conjunction with any race. Read more about race and ethnicity in the Census here.

Presidential voting pattern

See also: Presidential voting trends in Nebraska

Nebraska voted Republican in all five presidential elections between 2000 and 2016.

Pivot Counties (2016)

Ballotpedia identified 206 counties that voted for Donald Trump (R) in 2016 after voting for Barack Obama (D) in 2008 and 2012. Collectively, Trump won these Pivot Counties by more than 580,000 votes. Of these 206 counties, one is located in Nebraska, accounting for 0.5 percent of the total pivot counties.

More Nebraska coverage on Ballotpedia

• Elections in Nebraska
• United States congressional delegations from Nebraska
• Public policy in Nebraska
• Influencers in Nebraska
• Nebraska fact checks
• More...

See also

Suggest a link

• Nebraska 2016 ballot measures
• 2016 ballot measures
• Laws governing the initiative process in Nebraska

Related measures

Death penalty measures on the ballot in 2016
State	Measures
California	California Proposition 62, Repeal of the Death Penalty d
California	California Proposition 66, Death Penalty Procedures a
Oklahoma	Oklahoma Death Penalty, State Question 776 a

External links

Support a "repeal" vote

• Nebraskans for the Death Penalty

Support a "retain" vote

• Retain a Just Nebraska