Did the Arkansas AG approve the ballot title for 'The Arkansas Educational Rights Amendment of 2026,' which would require non-public schools that take state funds (or state tax credits) to meet the same academic and accreditation standards as public schools, and expand state education obligations?

Subject

The AG's certification of the popular name and ballot title for "The Arkansas Educational Rights Amendment of 2026," a proposed constitutional amendment that would require non-public schools receiving state or local funds to meet the same academic and accreditation standards as public schools, and would expand the State's education obligations.

Plain-English summary

April Reisma and Kwami Abdul-Bey, on behalf of "For AR Kids," asked the AG to certify the popular name and ballot title of a proposed constitutional amendment they wanted to put on the 2026 ballot. The AG noted the submission was identical to one he'd already substituted and certified in Op. 2024-079. Because his decision was governed by the rules already laid out in Op. 2023-131, the AG certified the submission again.

The amendment, if adopted, would do several things:

1. Equal standards for taxpayer-funded education. Any school that "receives State or local funds" would have to meet the same academic and accreditation standards as public schools, including identical assessments. "Receives State or local funds" is defined broadly to capture: direct receipt by the school, receipt by the student or family (vouchers, tax credits), or financial assistance funded by tax-credit-qualifying contributions. Schools that fail those standards would lose access to State or local funds.

2. Expanded definition of "adequate education." The amendment would constitutionally require the State to provide:
   - Universal voluntary early childhood education (ages 3 through Kindergarten),
   - Universal voluntary afterschool and summer programs,
   - Assistance to children within 200% of federal poverty line,
   - Full services for students with disabilities meeting individualized needs.

3. Defines what "adequate education" means in seven domains: oral and written communication, knowledge of economic/social/political systems, governmental processes, self-knowledge and wellness, the arts, advanced training preparation, and competitive academic or vocational skills.

4. Locks the amendment in. The General Assembly cannot amend, alter, or repeal it without a vote of the people.

5. Severability clause. If a court strikes part of the amendment, the rest stands.

The AG's role under A.C.A. § 7-9-107 is narrow. He reviews the popular name and ballot title for legal compliance (clarity, lack of bias, proper notice). He does not opine on the merits of the proposed amendment. The AG explicitly noted: "My decision to certify or reject a popular name and ballot title is unrelated to my view of the proposed measure's merits. I am not authorized to consider the measure's merits when considering certification."

The AG appended a cautionary note about complexity. The Arkansas Supreme Court has repeatedly warned that long, complex amendments are susceptible to ballot-title challenges. Any ambiguity in the text "could lead to a successful court challenge." The AG suggested the sponsors think hard about the trade-off between scope and litigation risk.

What this means for you

Ballot initiative sponsors (the petitioner audience)

Three things to take from this opinion:

1. AG certification is a green light to circulate, not a guarantee of validity. Once certified, the petition can be circulated. But the popular name and ballot title remain vulnerable to a post-certification court challenge, especially given the amendment's length and complexity. Sponsors should expect a challenge if they collect enough signatures to qualify for the ballot.
2. Use the canvasser instructions in your petition. Under § 7-9-108, every petition must include the canvasser/signer instructions the AG provides. Skipping them is a fatal defect. The AG noted that the instructions may be revised in 2025 to incorporate any relevant legislative changes; check before circulating.
3. The AG didn't bless the amendment substantively. A certification just means the popular name and ballot title pass the legal-form test, not that the amendment is constitutional or sound policy. Courts review the merits separately if the measure is challenged after passage.

Arkansas voters

If this amendment makes the ballot, you'll be voting on a long, complex measure. The AG flagged that complexity makes amendments vulnerable to court challenge if any ambiguity is found. Read the full text, not just the title.

The substantive impact: private schools that accept state-funded vouchers or LEARNS Act-style tax-credit money would have to meet public-school academic standards. The amendment also constitutionalizes universal pre-K, afterschool, and summer programs, which currently aren't constitutionally required. These are major shifts.

Public school administrators

The amendment's key effect on public schools is preserving the current accreditation regime. Public schools already follow these standards. The amendment is mostly about requiring private schools that take state money to play by the same rules.

If the amendment passes, the immediate operational impact on a public-school district is small (you already meet the standards). The bigger downstream effect is on funding allocations: if private schools lose access to state funds for failing the standards, that money may flow back to public schools, depending on how the General Assembly responds.

Private and parochial school administrators

This is the audience the amendment most directly targets. Three planning considerations:

1. Vouchers and tax-credit-funded scholarships create the trigger. If your school doesn't accept any state funds, vouchers, or scholarships funded by state-tax-credit donations, the amendment doesn't affect you. The "receives State or local funds" definition reaches schools, students, and families, so you can't structure around it by routing money through families.
2. The accreditation requirement is the operational cost. Identical academic standards, identical accreditation standards, identical assessments. For a small parochial school, that's a substantial reorganization (curriculum, testing, reporting infrastructure).
3. Failure to meet standards = no funds, not closure. The amendment doesn't shut down failing private schools; it just denies them access to State or local funds. They can continue as private-pay schools.

School choice advocates

The amendment is a direct response to LEARNS Act voucher expansion in Arkansas. If passed, it conditions voucher receipt on equivalence with public-school accreditation, which advocates may see as undermining the choice rationale. Litigation around the ballot-title sufficiency is the likely first front; substantive constitutional challenges (federal preemption arguments around religious schools, equal protection) would follow if the amendment is adopted.

Constitutional amendment attorneys

The AG's caution about length and complexity is a real risk signal. The Arkansas Supreme Court has invalidated lengthy ballot titles. See, e.g., the line of cases the AG cites: prior Ops. 2023-038, 2007-160, 2005-212, 2000-137. The AG synthesized those in Op. 2023-038. If you're representing the sponsors, do a fine-grained re-read of the ballot title for any ambiguity. Common pitfalls include defining terms that have legal-of-art meaning (the amendment's "receives State or local funds" definition is exactly the kind of phrase that could be challenged as ambiguous).

Common questions

Q: What does "AG certification" mean for a ballot title?

Under A.C.A. § 7-9-107, the AG must review proposed popular names and ballot titles for ballot measures. The AG can certify as submitted, substitute and certify a corrected version, or reject. Certification means the AG has determined the title meets the legal-form test (it fairly summarizes the measure, isn't misleading, etc.). It does NOT mean the AG has approved the merits of the proposed measure.

Q: Why didn't the AG comment on whether the amendment is a good idea?

He's not allowed to. § 7-9-107 limits him to the form-and-clarity review. The AG specifically said: "I am not authorized to consider the measure's merits when considering certification." This avoids putting the office in the position of vouching for or against political proposals.

Q: What happens next?

Sponsors collect signatures. Arkansas requires a high threshold for constitutional amendments (10% of the votes in the last gubernatorial election, distributed across counties). If they qualify for the ballot and the amendment passes by majority vote, it becomes part of the Arkansas Constitution unless a court strikes it.

Q: Could the ballot title be challenged in court?

Yes. After certification, opponents can challenge the popular name and ballot title in the Arkansas Supreme Court. The standard is whether the ballot title is "free from misleading tendencies," sufficient to inform a fairminded voter, and a "fair and impartial" summary of the measure. Long, complex amendments are common targets.

Q: What is Op. 2024-079?

The AG's earlier certification of the same popular name and ballot title. The 2024 version was substituted and certified by the AG; the 2025 resubmission is identical, so this 2025-016 opinion is essentially a re-certification.

Q: Why did the AG decline to opine on pending bills?

Because § 25-16-701 prohibits the AG's office from giving private legal advice. When the sponsors asked about the legal effects of certain pending bills, the AG explained that opining on hypothetical bills would step outside the office's authority.

Q: Does this amendment affect homeschoolers?

Probably yes if they receive state funds (the LEARNS Act allows certain expenditures for homeschoolers under the Education Freedom Account program). The "receives State or local funds" definition reaches "the school, a student attending the school, or the student's parents or guardians." Homeschool families would have to meet the same standards if they accept state-funded scholarships or tax-credit-funded support.

Background and statutory framework

Arkansas's direct-democracy framework is in Article 5, § 1 of the Arkansas Constitution and implemented by A.C.A. § 7-9-101 et seq. The AG's role under § 7-9-107 is to review proposed ballot titles and popular names for measures sponsors want to put on the ballot, with three possible outcomes: certify as submitted, substitute and certify, or reject.

The standards the AG applies are summarized in Op. 2023-131 (the AG's "starter kit" for ballot-title review):

• The popular name must be "free from misleading tendencies," brief, and informative.
• The ballot title must contain enough information to allow a fair-minded voter to make an intelligent choice.
• The ballot title must not be misleading.
• The ballot title must not be partisan or argumentative.

The AG has no authority to evaluate the merits of the proposed measure (Op. 2023-131; see also the long line of pre-2003 AG opinions establishing this rule).

§ 7-9-108 requires every petition to include canvasser/signer instructions provided by the AG. The AG specifically reserves the right to revise these instructions to incorporate legislative changes between certification and circulation.

The Arkansas Supreme Court's ballot-title review framework is summarized in Op. 2023-038. Length and complexity correlate with vulnerability to challenge. Significant changes in law often have unintended consequences that, if known, would give voters serious ground for reflection.

Citations

• A.C.A. § 7-9-107 (AG certification of popular name and ballot title)
• A.C.A. § 7-9-108 (petition instructions to canvassers and signers)
• A.C.A. § 25-16-701 (prohibition on AG giving private legal advice)
• Prior AG opinions: 2024-079 (initial certification), 2023-131 (rules governing AG review), 2023-038 (length and complexity), 2007-160, 2005-212, 2000-137

Source

• Landing page: https://arkansasag.gov/divisions/opinions-foia/attorney-general-opinions-search/

Original opinion text

Opinion No. 2025-016
February 26, 2025
April Reisma and Kwami Abdul-Bey
For AR Kids
1308 West Second Street
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
Dear Ms. Reisma and Mr. Abdul-Bey:

I am writing in response to your request, made under A.C.A. § 7-9-107, that I certify the popular
name and ballot title for a proposed constitutional amendment. Your submission is identical to the
popular name and ballot title I substituted and certified in Opinion No. 2024-079.

My decision to certify or reject a popular name and ballot title is unrelated to my view of the
proposed measure's merits. I am not authorized to consider the measure's merits when considering
certification.

1. Request. Under A.C.A. § 7-9-107, you have asked me to certify the following popular name
   and ballot title for a proposed amendment to the Arkansas Constitution:

Popular Name
The Arkansas Educational Rights Amendment of 2026

Ballot Title
An amendment to Article 14 (Education) of the Arkansas constitution requiring
identical academic standards and identical standards for accreditation, including
assessments of students and schools based on such standards, for any school that
receives State or local funds; defining "receives, or in receipt of, any State or local
funds" to mean: (i) receipt by the school of any State or local funds, property, or
tax credits to cover or defray, in whole or in part, the costs of any student attending
the school; (ii) receipt by the student attending the school, or the student's parents
or guardians, of any State or local funds, property, or tax credits to cover or defray,
in whole or in part, the costs of the student attending the school; or (iii) receipt by
a school, a student attending the school, or the student's parents or guardians, of
financial assistance for the cost of the student attending the school that is funded,
in whole or in part, by monetary contributions that qualify for a State tax credit
under Arkansas law; denying State or local funds to any non-public school that fails
to meet the same academic standards, standards for accreditation, or assessment
requirements as public schools; expanding the State's obligation to ever maintain a
general, suitable, and efficient system of free public schools to include:
(1) universal access to voluntary, early childhood education for students three (3)
years old until they qualify for Kindergarten; (2) universal access to voluntary
afterschool and summer programs necessary for the achievement of an adequate
education; (3) assistance to children who are within 200% of the federal poverty
line so that the qualifying children can achieve an adequate education and overcome
the negative impact of poverty on education; and (4) services that fully meet the
individualized needs of students with disabilities to allow them meaningful access
to integrated education; defining an adequate education as, without limitation, all
children developing sufficient: (1) oral and written communication skills to enable
students to function in a complex and rapidly changing civilization; (2) knowledge
of economic, social, and political systems to enable students to make informed
choices; (3) understanding of governmental processes to enable students to
understand the issues that affect their community, state, and nation; (4) self-
knowledge and knowledge of their mental and physical wellness; (5) grounding in
the arts to enable students to appreciate their cultural and historical heritage;
(6) training or preparation for advanced training in either academic or vocational
fields, so as to enable children to choose and pursue life work intelligently; and
(7) academic or vocational skills to enable public school students to compete
favorably with their counterparts in surrounding states, in academics or in the job
market; requiring the General Assembly to enact legislation to implement this
amendment, including allocating funding necessary to fully implement this
amendment; forbidding the General Assembly from amending, altering, or
repealing this amendment absent a vote of the people; and providing that this
amendment's provisions are severable.

2. Rules governing my review. In Opinion No. 2023-131, I explained the rules governing popular
   names and ballot titles, and I also explained the rules governing my review of proposed measures.
   Rather than repeat those explanations, I incorporate them here by reference.

3. Application. Having reviewed the text of your proposed constitutional amendment, as well as
   your proposed popular name and ballot title, I must certify your popular name and ballot title as
   submitted.

While I have certified your popular name and ballot title as submitted, I believe that, in light of the
significance of the subject matter undertaken and the potential complexity and far-reaching effects
of this proposal, a few cautionary notes are warranted. You should be aware that experience has
shown a correlation between the length and complexity of constitutional amendments and their
susceptibility to a successful ballot-title challenge. Any ambiguity in the text of a measure could
lead to a successful court challenge. Significant changes in law often have unintended
consequences that, if known, would give voters serious ground for reflection. As several of my
predecessors have noted when certifying certain lengthy and complex ballot titles, the Arkansas
Supreme Court has repeatedly warned sponsors of statewide measures about their ballot titles'
length and complexity. In Opinion No. 2023-038, I summarized the Court's decisions on the
significance of a ballot title's length and complexity.

Under 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 the associated penalties
for violations. I have included a copy of the instructions that should be incorporated into your
petition before circulation. Please note, however, that I may revise these instructions in 2025 to
incorporate any relevant legislative changes.

4. Pending Legislation. You have also asked me to opine about the legal effects of certain bills if
   enacted. I must decline because this office is prohibited from providing private legal advice.

Assistant Attorney General Jodie Keener prepared this opinion, which I hereby approve.

Sincerely,

TIM GRIFFIN
Attorney General