Did the Arkansas Attorney General eventually certify the ballot title for the four-year-term-of-office initiative for justices of the peace?
Subject
After AG Griffin rejected David Dinwiddie's first submission in Opinion 2026-022, Dinwiddie revised the proposed initiated constitutional amendment and resubmitted. AG Griffin substituted a shorter popular name and a Flesch-Kincaid-compliant ballot title and certified them. The AG also repeated his earlier warning that the "qualified electors of each township" language in the amendment text could still be found misleading by a court.
Plain-English summary
This is the second AG opinion in a paired sequence. In Opinion 2026-022 (March 16, 2026), AG Griffin rejected Dinwiddie's first submission because the ballot title referred to a December 31, 2026 effective date that did not appear in the amendment text. Dinwiddie revised the measure and resubmitted.
In this opinion, AG Griffin certified the resubmission. Two adjustments were made along the way.
First, the popular name. Dinwiddie had used identical text for both the popular name ("A PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT CHANGING THE TERM OF OFFICE FOR JUSTICE OF THE PEACE FROM TWO (2) YEARS TO FOUR (4) YEARS") and the ballot title. The AG noted that a popular name is "primarily an identification tool," and "need not have the same detailed information as is required for the ballot title, else there would be no difference between the two." Citing Pafford v. Hall, the AG substituted a shorter popular name: "The Justice of the Peace Terms of Office Amendment of 2026."
Second, the ballot title. The original submission had a Flesch-Kincaid reading level of 18.6 (graduate level), well above the 8th-grade ceiling imposed by Act 602 of 2025. The resubmitted ballot title scored 10.1, still above the 8th-grade ceiling. So the AG substituted a compliant version: "A constitutional amendment to change the term of office for justice of the peace from two years to four years."
The AG repeated the warning from Opinion 2026-022 that the amendment text continues to use "qualified electors of each township" language, which Amendment 55 to the Arkansas Constitution impliedly repealed. The AG flagged that a court could find this language misleading.
The AG also reminded Dinwiddie that under A.C.A. § 7-9-108, instructions to canvassers and signers must precede every petition. The AG enclosed a copy of the required instructions for incorporation into the petition before circulation.
What this means for you
If you are sponsoring an initiated amendment or act in Arkansas
Two practical lessons. First, the popular name and the ballot title serve different functions. The popular name is short and identifying; the ballot title summarizes the substance. If you submit identical text for both, the AG will substitute a shorter popular name. Save yourself a step and write them as different things from the start.
Second, the Flesch-Kincaid 8th-grade ceiling under Act 602 of 2025 is binding. Run any ballot title through a Flesch-Kincaid checker before submission. A reading level of 8 or below is the target; anything higher will be substituted or rejected. Short sentences and plain vocabulary are the easiest path.
If the AG flagged a substantive ambiguity in your text (as the "township" language was flagged here), the resubmission process will not fix that ambiguity. The AG can fix the title and popular name; only you can fix the text. If you do not fix the text, a court could later strike the certification on the same ground the AG flagged.
If you are an Arkansas voter or signature gatherer
If this measure makes the ballot, you will see "The Justice of the Peace Terms of Office Amendment of 2026" as the popular name and "A constitutional amendment to change the term of office for justice of the peace from two years to four years" as the ballot title. Note that the AG-certified version describes only justices of the peace; the original first submission also covered constables, but the resubmission certified here mentions only JPs. (The substituted popular name and ballot title in this opinion track the resubmitted amendment text, which is what reached signature gathering.)
If you are concerned the ballot title or popular name is misleading
The AG's certification is reviewable. The Arkansas Supreme Court has the final word on ballot title sufficiency, and challenges typically come during the signature-verification or pre-election phases. The "township electors" issue the AG flagged could be a basis for challenge if a court finds the resulting title misleads voters about whether the amendment changes how JPs are elected (it would not, but the language creates the ambiguity).
If you draft initiative measures professionally
Two procedural details to remember on every submission. First, A.C.A. § 7-9-108 requires that signer instructions precede every petition. The AG includes a copy of the required instructions with each certification. Make sure the printed petition incorporates them before circulation. Second, when the AG substitutes a popular name or ballot title, the substituted version is what governs; the version you submitted is no longer authoritative.
Background and statutory framework
This opinion incorporates the framework from Opinion 2026-022 by reference. The same A.C.A. § 7-9-107 review process applies. The AG has three options under § 7-9-107(d)(1): certify as submitted, substitute and certify, or reject and instruct redesign.
The popular name framework. Stiritz v. Martin (2018) describes the popular name as "an identification tool." Pafford v. Hall (1950) holds that a popular name "need not have the same detailed information as is required for the ballot title, else there would be no difference between the two." The AG cited both to justify substituting a shorter popular name in place of Dinwiddie's verbatim duplication of the ballot title.
The Flesch-Kincaid framework. Act 602 of 2025, codified at A.C.A. § 7-9-107(l), prohibits the AG from certifying a ballot title with a reading level above 8th grade as measured by the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level formula as it existed on January 1, 2025. The AG can substitute a compliant title under § 7-9-107(d)(1).
The "township electors" issue. Section 2(a) of Amendment 55 to the Arkansas Constitution shifted JP elections from township-based voting (Article 7, Section 38) to quorum-court-district-based voting in 1974. Reintroducing "qualified electors of each township" language without explanation creates ambiguity about whether the sponsor is reviving the pre-Amendment 55 township structure. The AG warned in Opinion 2026-022 that a court could find the resulting title misleading; the warning carries forward into this opinion because the resubmitted text retained the township language.
The signer-instruction requirement. A.C.A. § 7-9-108 requires that instructions to canvassers and signers, informing them of the privileges granted by the Arkansas Constitution and the associated penalties for violations, precede every petition. The AG enclosed a copy of those instructions with this certification for incorporation into the petition before circulation.
Common questions
What is the difference between this opinion and Opinion 2026-022?
Opinion 2026-022 (March 16, 2026) was the AG's rejection of Dinwiddie's first submission, which had a December 31, 2026 effective date in the ballot title that did not appear in the amendment text. This opinion (April 2, 2026) is the AG's certification of Dinwiddie's revised submission, with substituted popular name and ballot title.
Why did the AG substitute a popular name when the proposed one was just identical to the ballot title?
Because a popular name is supposed to be an identification tool, not a full summary. If the popular name and the ballot title are identical, there is no difference between the two. The AG substituted "The Justice of the Peace Terms of Office Amendment of 2026" as a more suitable identification tool.
What was wrong with the resubmitted ballot title at grade 10.1?
Act 602 of 2025 caps the ballot title at 8th-grade reading level on Flesch-Kincaid. Grade 10.1 is still above the cap, so the AG substituted a shorter, more readable version: "A constitutional amendment to change the term of office for justice of the peace from two years to four years."
What is the "township electors" warning?
Amendment 55 to the Arkansas Constitution shifted JP elections from township-based to quorum-court-district-based voting in 1974. The proposed amendment text reuses "qualified electors of each township" language. The AG warned in Opinion 2026-022 (and again here) that this could be found misleading by a court. The AG cannot fix the amendment text; only the sponsor can. The warning is carried forward in case a future challenger relies on it.
What is A.C.A. § 7-9-108 and why was it mentioned at the end?
It requires that instructions to canvassers and signers (about constitutional privileges and penalties for violations) precede every petition. The AG includes a copy of those instructions with each certification, and the sponsor must incorporate them into the petition before circulation.
Why did the popular name change to "of 2026"?
The substituted popular name follows a common Arkansas convention: short, identifying, and tagged to the year of submission. "The Justice of the Peace Terms of Office Amendment of 2026" identifies the proposal without trying to describe its substance the way a ballot title would.
What happens next for this initiative?
After certification, the sponsor can begin gathering signatures. The Arkansas Constitution requires a specific number of valid signatures from registered voters across a minimum number of counties for an initiated constitutional amendment to qualify for the ballot. After signatures are filed and verified, the measure goes to the ballot. Pre-election challenges to the ballot title or popular name go to the Arkansas Supreme Court.
Are constables still part of this amendment?
The original submission covered both justices of the peace and constables. The resubmitted text covers only justices of the peace, based on the certified popular name and ballot title in this opinion. Sponsors who want to extend constable terms would need a separate submission.
Citations
- Arkansas statutes: A.C.A. § 7-9-107 (review and certification); § 7-9-107(d)(1) (substitution authority); § 7-9-108 (signer instruction requirement).
- Cases on popular name function: Stiritz v. Martin, 2018 Ark. 281, 556 S.W.3d 523; Pafford v. Hall, 217 Ark. 734, 233 S.W.2d 72 (1950).
- Cross-reference: Arkansas AG Opinion 2026-022 (rejection of first submission, incorporated by reference).
Source
Original opinion text
Opinion No. 2026-030
April 2, 2026
David E. Dinwiddie
8608 Princeton Pike
Pine Bluff, Arkansas 71602
Dear Mr. Dinwiddie:
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. In Opinion No. 2026-022, I rejected a prior version of your proposed initiated amendment to the Arkansas Constitution. You have now revised the language of your proposal and submitted it for certification.
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.
- Request. Under A.C.A. § 7-9-107, you have asked me to certify the following popular name and ballot title for a proposed initiated amendment to the Arkansas Constitution:
Popular Name
A PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT CHANGING THE TERM OF OFFICE FOR JUSTICE OF THE PEACE FROM TWO (2) YEARS TO FOUR (4) YEARS.
Ballot Title
A PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT CHANGING THE TERM OF OFFICE FOR JUSTICE OF THE PEACE FROM TWO (2) YEARS TO FOUR (4) YEARS.
- Rules governing my review. In Opinion No. 2026-022, issued in response to your first submission for review and certification, I explained the rules and legal standards that govern my review of popular names and ballot titles. I rely on those same rules and legal standards here and incorporate them by reference.
BOB R. BROOKS JR. JUSTICE BUILDING
101 WEST CAPITOL AVENUE
LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201
TIM GRIFFIN
ATTORNEY GENERAL
-
Application to your popular name. Your popular name contains the same language as the ballot title. Because a popular name "is an identification tool," it "need not have the same detailed information as is required for the ballot title, else there would be no difference between the two." Thus, I am substituting and certifying a "more suitable" popular name. The popular name provided below is substituted and certified for your proposed constitutional amendment.
-
Application to your ballot title. In Opinion No. 2026-022, I noted that Act 602 prohibits me from certifying ballot titles that are above an eighth-grade reading level under the Flesch-Kincaid Level formula, and the ballot title you had originally submitted ranked at grade 18.6. In this current submission, the ballot title ranks at grade 10.1. Therefore, I have substituted and certified a revised ballot title that complies with Act 602.
-
Substitution and certification. With the above changes incorporated, the following popular name and ballot title are substituted and certified:
Popular Name
The Justice of the Peace Terms of Office Amendment of 2026
Ballot Title
A constitutional amendment to change the term of office for justice of the peace from two years to four years
In Opinion No. 2026-022, I cautioned you concerning a potential ambiguity arising from the proposed amendment's recitation of the phrase, "qualified electors of each township." Because such language remains in your current submission, I rely on the same warnings and legal standards contained in Opinion No. 2026-022 and incorporate them by reference. A court could find that your "township" language in the proposed measure is misleading.
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.
Assistant Attorney General William R. Olson prepared this opinion, which I hereby approve.
Sincerely,
TIM GRIFFIN
Attorney General