Does the same ballot-naming gap from Arkansas AG Opinion 2013-067 apply to House Joint Resolution 1009?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2013. Ezel answers yours: what it means for your facts, under current Arkansas law, with citations.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 2013. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
Plain-English summary
Secretary of State Mark Martin asked the Attorney General the same two questions he had asked about Senate Joint Resolution 7 in Opinion 2013-067, this time about House Joint Resolution 1009 (Issue No. 3), a third constitutional amendment the 89th General Assembly referred to the November 2014 ballot.
The Attorney General reached the same conclusion by incorporating the reasoning of Opinion 2013-067: a 2013 statutory change (Act 1413) had removed the Attorney General's authority to prepare popular names for legislatively referred constitutional amendments, and no other official had been expressly assigned that task. As with SJR 7, the opinion recommended legislative clarification, but concluded that pending such clarification, the Secretary of State could supply a popular name to properly identify HJR 1009 on the ballot.
Background and analysis (as of 2013)
This opinion is a companion to Opinion 2013-067, issued the same day in response to the Secretary of State's questions about multiple 2013 legislative constitutional amendments. Rather than restate the underlying statutory history (the 1933 origin of ballot-designation requirements, the 1993 transfer of naming duty to the Attorney General, and the 2013 amendment narrowing that duty to people-initiated measures only) or the constitutional analysis of Article 19, Section 22's separate-submission requirement, the opinion expressly incorporated Opinion 2013-067's discussion and applied its conclusion to HJR 1009.
Citations and references
This opinion incorporates by reference the statutes and cases discussed in the companion opinion, Arkansas AG Opinion 2013-067 (issued the same day, addressing SJR 7), including A.C.A. § 7-9-110 (as amended by Acts 2013, No. 1413), Ark. Const. art. 19, § 22, and the Arkansas Supreme Court's decisions on legislative ballot-title requirements (Chaney v. Bryant, Thiel v. Priest, and related cases).
Source
Original opinion text
STATE OF ARKANSAS
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
DUSTIN McDANIEL
Opinion No. 2013-069
December 23, 2013
The Honorable Mark Martin
Secretary of State
State Capitol, Suite 256
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1094
Dear Mr. Martin:
You have requested my opinion on the following questions concerning the
preparation of a popular name for a resolution of the Arkansas General Assembly
that was passed at the 2013 regular session:1
-
Does the Attorney General still have the statutory authority to
prepare a Popular Name for the constitutional amendments
referred by the Eighty-Ninth General Assembly? If the answer is
"yes," I request that you prepare a Popular Name for HJR 1009
(Issue No. 3). -
If the answer to the first question is "no," what is the proper
course for preparing a Popular Name for HJR 1009 (Issue No.
3)?
RESPONSE
The answer to your first question appears to be "no" for the reasons explained in
Attorney General Opinion 2013-067, which I recently issued in response to your
request for my opinion on these same questions concerning another joint
resolution (SJR 7). I will not restate the basis for this conclusion, but instead refer
you to Opinion 2013-067 for the analysis.
1 Pursuant to Article 19, Section 22 of the Arkansas Constitution, the General Assembly may propose up to
three constitutional amendments for referral to the voters. The resolution at issue, House Joint Resolution
(HJR) 1009 (Issue No. 3), was passed by the 89th General Assembly and will appear on the state's
November 4, 2014 General Election ballot.
323 CENTER STREET, SUITE 200 * LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201
TELEPHONE (501) 682-2007 * FAX (501) 682-8084
INTERNET WEBSITE * http://www.ag.state.ar.us/
The Honorable Mark Martin
Secretary of State
Opinion No. 2013-069
Page 2
resolution (SJR 7). I will not restate the basis for this conclusion, but instead refer
you to Opinion 2013-067 for the analysis.
In response to your second question, as also explained in Opinion 2013-067, there
currently is no express statutory course for identifying legislatively referred
constitutional amendments on the ballot when the General Assembly has not
designated a popular name or ballot title in the joint resolution. While legislative
clarification is therefore indicated, it is my opinion that the Secretary of State may,
pending such clarification, supply a popular name as a means of identifying HJR
1009 on the ballot. As stated in Opinion 2013-067 with respect to SJR 7, my
office is available for consultation in this regard.
Deputy Attorney General Elisabeth A. Walker prepared the foregoing opinion,
which I hereby approve.
Sincerely,
Attorney General
DM:EAW/cyh
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 2013 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current Arkansas statutes and case law and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the law it relies on.