Did the Arkansas AG certify the popular name and ballot title for a referendum to approve or reject Act 137 of 2015 (the Intrastate Commerce Improvement Act)?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2015. Ask about yours and see what current Arkansas law means for your facts, with citations you can check.
Plain-English summary
Attorney David Couch asked the Arkansas Attorney General to certify a popular name and ballot title for a proposed referendum on the Arkansas Intrastate Commerce Improvement Act, Act 137 of 2015. The proposed popular name was “A REFERENDUM TO APPROVE OR REJECT THE ARKANSAS INTRASTATE COMMERCE IMPROVEMENT ACT.”
Attorney General Leslie Rutledge found the popular name sufficient and certified it as submitted. She substituted and certified a more suitable ballot title. The substitute makes the choice explicit: a vote “FOR” would approve the Act; a vote “AGAINST” would reject it. It then reproduces two operative provisions of the Act. The first bars a county, municipality, or other political subdivision from adopting or enforcing a rule or policy that creates a protected classification or prohibits discrimination on a basis not contained in state law. The second excludes rules or policies that pertain only to that subdivision's own employees.
The AG said the substituted title, read with the popular name, accurately set forth the referendum's purpose. She did not evaluate the merits of Act 137. The opinion says instructions to canvassers and signers had to be incorporated into the petition before circulation. It does not discuss whether the referendum later reached a ballot, the effect on any particular local ordinance, or subsequent litigation.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 2015 and certifies petition language. It does not establish a later election outcome or the present reach of Act 137. Check current law and the referendum's history for those questions.
Common questions
What did the AG certify?
She certified the sponsor's popular name as submitted and a ballot title she substituted. Both certified texts are reproduced in the original opinion below.
What would “FOR” and “AGAINST” have meant?
The substituted title says a “FOR” vote would approve Act 137 and an “AGAINST” vote would reject it.
What exception appears in the title?
The Act's quoted subsection (b) says the prohibition does not apply to a rule or policy pertaining only to employees of a county, municipality, or other political subdivision.
Did this opinion decide the validity of a city ordinance?
No. It certifies referendum wording and does not analyze any particular local ordinance or later court decision.
Background and statutory framework
A.C.A. § 7-9-107 governed review of the proposed popular name and ballot title. The AG said a clearer title should be substituted for the proposed title while leaving the popular name as submitted. The opinion cites A.C.A. § 7-9-108 for petition instructions. The substituted title identifies the measure under review as Act 137 of 2015 and quotes its two relevant provisions.
Citations
- A.C.A. § 7-9-107 (popular name and ballot title review)
- A.C.A. § 7-9-108 (petition instructions)
- Act 137 of 2015 (subject of the referendum)
Source
Original opinion text
STATE OF ARKANSAS
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
LESLIE RUTLEDGE
Opinion No. 2015-036
April 23, 2015
David A. Couch
Attorney at Law
1501 North University, Suite 228
Little Rock, Arkansas 72207
Dear Mr. Couch:
Neither certification nor rejection of a popular name and ballot title reflects my view of the merits of the proposal. This Office has been given no authority to consider the merits of any measure.
This is in response to your request for certification, pursuant to A.C.A. § 7-9-107 (Repl. 2013), of the following popular name and ballot title for a proposed referendum measure:
Popular Name
A REFERENDUM TO APPROVE OR REJECT THE ARKANSAS INTRASTATE COMMERCE IMPROVEMENT ACT
Ballot Title
A referendum to approve or reject the Arkansas Intrastate Commerce Improvement Act that prohibits a county, municipality, or other political subdivision of the state from adopting or enforcing an ordinance resolution, rule, or policy that creates a protected classification or prohibits discrimination on a basis not in state law; and provides that such prohibition does not apply to a rule or policy that pertains only to employees of the county, municipality, or other political subdivision.
[The opinion's body sets out the standard ballot-title sufficiency principles from Arkansas Women's Political Caucus v. Riviere, Pafford v. Hall, Chaney v. Bryant, Moore v. Hall, May v. Daniels, Becker v. Riviere, Bailey v. McCuen, Becker v. McCuen, Christian Civic Action Committee v. McCuen, and Roberts v. Priest.]
Applying the above precepts, it is my conclusion that your proposed popular name is sufficient and it is therefore certified as submitted. In my judgment, however, a more suitable, complete, and correct ballot title should be substituted for that proposed. The following ballot title is hereby certified in order to ensure that, when construed together, the popular name and ballot title accurately set forth the purpose of the proposal:
Popular Name
A REFERENDUM TO APPROVE OR REJECT THE ARKANSAS INTRASTATE COMMERCE IMPROVEMENT ACT
Ballot Title
This referendum enables the people to vote for or against the Arkansas Intrastate Commerce Improvement Act, enacted by the 90th General Assembly as Act 137 of 2015 (the "Act"). A vote "FOR" will approve the Act; a vote "AGAINST" will reject the Act.
The Act provides:
(a) A county, municipality, or other political subdivision of the state shall not adopt or enforce an ordinance, resolution, rule, or policy that creates a protected classification or prohibits discrimination on a basis not contained in state law.
(b) This section does not apply to a rule or policy that pertains only to the employees of a county, municipality, or other political subdivision.
Pursuant to A.C.A. § 7-9-108, instructions to canvassers and signers must precede every petition, informing them of the privileges granted by the Arkansas Constitution and of the associated penalties for violations. Enclosed herewith, over the signature of the Attorney General, are instructions that should be incorporated in your petition prior to circulation.
Sincerely,
LESLIE RUTLEDGE
Attorney General
LR/cyh
Enclosures
What does Arkansas law say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 2015. Ezel checks the current Arkansas statutes and case law, applies them to your situation, and cites what it relies on.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace