doe
et
al
reed
washington
secretary
state
et
argued
april
decided
june
washington
constitution
allows
citizens
challenge
state
laws
referendum
initiate
referendum
proponents
must
file
petition
secretary
state
contains
valid
signatures
registered
washington
voters
equal
exceeding
four
percent
votes
cast
office
governor
last
gubernatorial
election
valid
submission
requires
signature
also
signer
address
county
registered
vote
may
washington
governor
christine
gregoire
signed
law
senate
bill
expanded
rights
responsibilities
domestic
partners
including
domestic
partners
month
protect
marriage
washington
one
petitioners
organized
state
political
committee
purpose
collecting
petition
signatures
necessary
place
referendum
challenging
sb
ballot
referendum
made
onto
ballot
protect
marriage
washington
planned
encourage
voters
reject
sb
protect
marriage
washington
submitted
petition
signatures
secretary
state
conducting
verification
canvassing
process
required
state
law
secretary
determined
petition
contained
sufficient
signatures
qualify
referendum
ballot
respondent
intervenors
invoked
washington
public
records
act
pra
obtain
copies
petition
contained
signers
names
addresses
petition
sponsor
certain
signers
filed
complaint
motion
injunctive
relief
federal
district
seeking
enjoin
public
release
petition
count
alleges
pra
unconstitutional
applied
referendum
petitions
count
ii
alleges
pra
unconstitutional
applied
referendum
petition
reasonable
probability
signatories
subjected
threats
harassment
reprisals
determining
pra
burdened
core
political
speech
district
held
plaintiffs
likely
succeed
merits
count
granted
preliminary
injunction
preventing
release
signatory
information
reviewing
count
ninth
circuit
held
plaintiffs
unlikely
succeed
claim
pra
unconstitutional
applied
referendum
petitions
general
therefore
reversed
held
disclosure
referendum
petitions
general
matter
violate
first
amendment
pp
plaintiffs
count
claim
relief
follow
injunction
barring
secretary
state
releasing
referendum
petitions
public
reach
beyond
particular
circumstances
plaintiffs
must
satisfy
standards
facial
challenge
extent
reach
see
stevens
pp
compelled
disclosure
signatory
information
referendum
petitions
subject
review
first
amendment
cases
individual
signature
express
view
law
subject
petition
overturned
even
signer
agnostic
merits
underlying
law
signature
still
expresses
political
view
question
considered
whole
electorate
meyer
grant
either
case
expression
political
view
implicates
first
amendment
right
petition
signing
remains
expressive
even
legal
effect
electoral
process
mean
electoral
context
irrelevant
nature
first
amendment
review
significant
flexibility
implementing
voting
systems
extent
regulation
concerns
legal
effect
particular
activity
process
government
afforded
substantial
latitude
enforce
regulation
also
pertinent
fact
pra
prohibition
speech
disclosure
requirement
may
burden
ability
speak
prevent
anyone
speaking
citizens
federal
election
reviewed
first
amendment
challenges
disclosure
requirements
electoral
context
exacting
scrutiny
standard
requiring
relation
disclosure
requirement
important
governmental
interest
withstand
scrutiny
strength
governmental
interest
must
reflect
seriousness
actual
burden
first
amendment
rights
davis
federal
election
pp
state
interest
preserving
integrity
electoral
process
suffices
defeat
argument
pra
unconstitutional
respect
referendum
petitions
general
interest
particularly
strong
respect
efforts
root
fraud
state
interest
limited
combating
fraud
extends
efforts
ferret
invalid
signatures
caused
fraud
simple
mistake
duplicate
signatures
signatures
individuals
registered
vote
state
state
interest
also
extends
generally
promoting
transparency
accountability
electoral
process
plaintiffs
contend
disclosure
sufficiently
related
interest
protecting
integrity
electoral
process
withstand
first
amendment
scrutiny
argue
disclosure
necessary
secretary
state
already
charged
verifying
canvassing
names
petition
measure
advocates
opponents
observe
process
citizen
challenge
secretary
actions
criminal
penalties
reduce
danger
fraud
petition
process
secretary
verification
canvassing
catch
invalid
signatures
public
disclosure
help
cure
inadequacies
secretary
process
disclosure
also
helps
prevent
fraud
outright
forgery
bait
switch
fraud
individual
signs
petition
based
misrepresentation
underlying
issue
disclosure
promotes
transparency
accountability
electoral
process
extent
measures
pp
plaintiffs
main
objection
strength
governmental
interest
reflect
seriousness
actual
burden
first
amendment
rights
davis
supra
according
plaintiffs
objective
seeking
disclosure
prevent
fraud
publicly
identify
signatories
broadcast
political
views
subject
petition
plaintiffs
allege
example
several
groups
plan
post
petitions
searchable
form
internet
encourage
citizens
seek
petition
signers
plaintiffs
argue
subject
threats
harassment
reprisals
problem
plaintiffs
argument
rests
almost
entirely
specific
harm
attend
disclosure
information
petition
question
stage
litigation
whether
disclosure
referendum
petitions
general
violates
first
amendment
faced
state
unrebutted
arguments
modest
burdens
attend
disclosure
typical
petition
plaintiffs
broad
challenge
pra
must
rejected
upholding
pra
challenge
foreclose
success
plaintiffs
narrower
challenge
count
ii
pending
district
see
buckley
valeo
pp
affirmed
roberts
delivered
opinion
kennedy
ginsburg
breyer
alito
sotomayor
joined
breyer
alito
filed
concurring
opinions
sotomayor
filed
concurring
opinion
stevens
ginsburg
joined
stevens
filed
opinion
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
breyer
joined
scalia
filed
opinion
concurring
judgment
thomas
filed
dissenting
opinion
john
doe
et
petitioners
sam
reed
washington
secretary
state
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
ninth
circuit
june
chief
justice
roberts
delivered
opinion
state
washington
allows
citizens
challenge
state
laws
referendum
roughly
four
percent
washington
voters
must
sign
petition
place
referendum
ballot
petition
law
must
include
names
addresses
signers
submitted
government
verification
canvassing
ensure
lawful
signatures
counted
washington
public
records
act
pra
authorizes
private
parties
obtain
copies
government
documents
state
construes
pra
cover
submitted
referendum
petitions
case
arises
state
law
extending
certain
benefits
couples
corresponding
referendum
petition
put
law
popular
vote
respondent
intervenors
invoked
pra
obtain
copies
petition
names
addresses
signers
certain
petition
signers
petition
sponsor
objected
arguing
public
disclosure
violate
rights
first
amendment
course
litigation
however
framed
legal
question
us
broadly
issue
stage
case
whether
disclosure
particular
petition
violate
first
amendment
whether
disclosure
referendum
petitions
general
conclude
disclosure
general
matter
violate
first
amendment
therefore
affirm
judgment
appeals
leave
lower
courts
consider
first
instance
signers
focused
claim
concerning
disclosure
information
particular
petition
pending
district
washington
constitution
reserves
people
power
reject
bill
limited
exceptions
relevant
referendum
process
wash
art
ii
initiate
referendum
proponents
must
file
petition
secretary
state
contains
valid
signatures
registered
washington
voters
equal
exceeding
four
percent
votes
cast
office
governor
last
gubernatorial
election
valid
submission
requires
signature
also
signer
address
county
registered
vote
rev
code
may
washington
governor
christine
gregoire
signed
law
senate
bill
expand
ed
rights
responsibilities
domestic
partners
including
domestic
partners
month
protect
marriage
washington
one
petitioners
organized
state
political
committee
purpose
collecting
petition
signatures
necessary
place
referendum
ballot
give
voters
opportunity
vote
sb
app
referendum
made
onto
ballot
protect
marriage
washington
planned
encourage
voters
reject
sb
july
protect
marriage
washington
submitted
secretary
state
petition
containing
signatures
see
brief
respondent
washington
families
standing
together
secretary
state
began
verification
canvassing
process
required
washington
law
ensure
legal
signatures
counted
rev
code
valid
signatures
required
place
referendum
ballot
sam
reed
washington
secretary
state
certification
referendum
secretary
state
determined
petition
contained
sufficient
number
valid
signatures
referendum
appeared
november
ballot
voters
approved
sb
margin
pra
rev
code
et
makes
public
records
available
public
inspection
copying
act
defines
ublic
record
writing
containing
information
relating
conduct
government
performance
governmental
proprietary
function
prepared
owned
used
retained
state
local
agency
washington
takes
position
referendum
petitions
public
records
brief
respondent
reed
august
secretary
received
requests
copies
petition
individual
four
entities
including
washington
coalition
open
government
wcog
washington
families
standing
together
wfst
two
respondents
two
entities
issued
joint
press
release
stating
intention
post
names
petition
signers
online
searchable
format
see
app
referendum
petition
sponsor
certain
signers
filed
complaint
motion
preliminary
injunction
district
western
district
washington
seeking
enjoin
secretary
state
publicly
releasing
documents
reveal
names
contact
information
petition
signers
app
count
complaint
alleges
public
records
act
unconstitutional
applied
referendum
petitions
count
ii
complaint
alleges
public
records
act
unconstitutional
applied
referendum
petition
reasonable
probability
signatories
referendum
petition
subjected
threats
harassment
reprisals
determining
pra
burdened
core
political
speech
district
held
plaintiffs
likely
succeed
merits
count
granted
preliminary
injunction
count
enjoining
release
information
petition
supp
wd
appeals
ninth
circuit
reversed
reviewing
count
complaint
appeals
held
plaintiffs
unlikely
succeed
claim
pra
unconstitutional
applied
referendum
petitions
generally
therefore
reversed
district
grant
preliminary
injunction
granted
certiorari
ii
important
outset
define
scope
challenge
us
noted
count
complaint
contends
pra
violates
first
amendment
applied
referendum
petitions
app
count
ii
asserts
pra
unconstitutional
applied
referendum
petition
district
decision
based
solely
count
appeals
decision
reversing
district
similarly
limited
neither
addressed
count
ii
parties
disagree
whether
count
properly
viewed
facial
challenge
compare
reply
brief
petitioners
count
expressly
made
challenge
brief
respondent
reed
facial
challenge
washington
public
records
act
obviously
characteristics
claim
applied
sense
seek
strike
pra
applications
extent
covers
referendum
petitions
claim
facial
limited
plaintiffs
particular
case
challenges
application
law
broadly
referendum
petitions
label
matters
important
point
plaintiffs
claim
relief
follow
injunction
barring
secretary
state
making
referendum
petitions
available
public
app
complaint
count
reach
beyond
particular
circumstances
plaintiffs
must
therefore
satisfy
standards
facial
challenge
extent
reach
see
stevens
slip
iii
compelled
disclosure
signatory
information
referendum
petitions
subject
review
first
amendment
individual
expresses
view
political
matter
signs
petition
washington
referendum
procedure
cases
individual
signature
express
view
law
subject
petition
overturned
even
signer
agnostic
merits
underlying
law
signature
still
expresses
political
view
question
considered
whole
electorate
meyer
grant
either
case
expression
political
view
implicates
first
amendment
right
state
cho
sen
tap
energy
legitimizing
power
democratic
process
must
accord
participants
process
first
amendment
rights
attach
roles
republican
party
white
internal
quotation
marks
ellipsis
omitted
respondents
counter
signing
petition
legally
operative
legislative
act
therefore
involve
significant
expressive
element
brief
respondent
reed
true
signing
referendum
petition
may
ultimately
legal
consequence
requiring
secretary
state
place
referendum
ballot
see
adding
legal
effect
expressive
activity
somehow
deprives
activity
expressive
component
taking
outside
scope
first
amendment
respondents
implicitly
recognize
signature
expresses
particular
viewpoint
arguing
one
purpose
served
disclosure
allow
public
engage
signers
debate
merits
underlying
law
see
brief
respondent
wcog
brief
respondent
wfst
petition
signing
remains
expressive
even
legal
effect
electoral
process
say
electoral
context
irrelevant
nature
first
amendment
review
allow
significant
flexibility
implementing
voting
systems
see
burdick
takushi
extent
regulation
concerns
legal
effect
particular
activity
process
government
afforded
substantial
latitude
enforce
regulation
also
pertinent
analysis
fact
pra
prohibition
speech
instead
disclosure
requirement
isclosure
requirements
may
burden
ability
speak
prevent
anyone
speaking
citizens
federal
election
slip
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
series
precedents
considering
first
amendment
challenges
disclosure
requirements
electoral
context
precedents
reviewed
challenges
termed
exacting
scrutiny
see
buckley
valeo
per
curiam
since
naacp
alabama
required
subordinating
interests
state
offered
justify
compelled
disclosure
survive
exacting
scrutiny
citizens
supra
slip
subjected
disclosure
requirements
quoting
buckley
supra
davis
federal
election
slip
governmental
interest
disclosure
survive
exacting
quoting
buckley
supra
buckley
american
constitutional
law
foundation
aclf
finding
disclosure
rules
fail
ed
exacting
scrutiny
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
standard
requires
relation
disclosure
requirement
important
governmental
interest
citizens
supra
slip
quoting
buckley
supra
withstand
scrutiny
strength
governmental
interest
must
reflect
seriousness
actual
burden
first
amendment
rights
davis
supra
slip
citing
buckley
supra
respondents
assert
two
interests
justify
burdens
compelled
disclosure
pra
first
amendment
rights
preserving
integrity
electoral
process
combating
fraud
detecting
invalid
signatures
fostering
government
transparency
accountability
providing
information
electorate
supports
petition
see
brief
respondent
reed
determine
state
interest
preserving
integrity
electoral
process
suffices
defeat
argument
pra
unconstitutional
respect
referendum
petitions
general
need
address
state
informational
interest
state
interest
preserving
integrity
electoral
process
undoubtedly
important
allowing
ballot
initiatives
considerable
leeway
protect
integrity
reliability
initiative
process
respect
election
processes
generally
aclf
state
interest
particularly
strong
respect
efforts
root
fraud
may
produce
fraudulent
outcomes
systemic
effect
well
drives
honest
citizens
democratic
process
breeds
distrust
government
purcell
gonzalez
per
curiam
see
also
crawford
marion
county
election
opinion
stevens
threat
fraud
context
merely
hypothetical
respondents
amici
cite
number
cases
fraud
across
country
support
point
see
brief
respondent
reed
brief
state
ohio
et
al
amici
curiae
state
interest
preserving
electoral
integrity
limited
combating
fraud
interest
extends
efforts
ferret
invalid
signatures
caused
fraud
simple
mistake
duplicate
signatures
signatures
individuals
registered
vote
state
see
brief
respondent
reed
interest
also
extends
generally
promoting
transparency
accountability
electoral
process
state
argues
essential
proper
functioning
democracy
plaintiffs
contend
disclosure
requirements
pra
sufficiently
related
interest
protecting
integrity
electoral
process
brief
petitioners
argue
disclosure
necessary
secretary
state
already
charged
verifying
canvassing
names
petition
advocates
opponents
measure
observe
process
citizen
challenge
secretary
actions
see
rev
code
also
stress
existing
criminal
penalties
reduce
danger
fraud
petition
process
see
brief
petitioners
secretary
verification
canvassing
catch
invalid
signatures
job
large
difficult
secretary
ordinarily
checks
signatures
brief
respondent
wfst
secretary
make
mistakes
see
brief
respondent
reed
public
disclosure
help
cure
inadequacies
verification
canvassing
process
disclosure
also
helps
prevent
certain
types
petition
fraud
otherwise
difficult
detect
outright
forgery
bait
switch
fraud
individual
signs
petition
based
misrepresentation
underlying
issue
see
brief
respondent
wfst
cf
brief
massachusetts
gay
lesbian
political
caucus
et
al
amici
curiae
detailing
bait
switch
fraud
petition
drive
massachusetts
signer
best
position
detect
types
fraud
public
disclosure
bring
issue
signer
attention
public
disclosure
thus
helps
ensure
signatures
counted
referenda
placed
ballot
garner
enough
valid
signatures
public
disclosure
also
promotes
transparency
accountability
electoral
process
extent
measures
light
foregoing
reject
plaintiffs
argument
conclude
public
disclosure
referendum
petitions
general
substantially
related
important
interest
preserving
integrity
electoral
plaintiffs
significant
objection
strength
governmental
interest
reflect
seriousness
actual
burden
first
amendment
rights
davis
slip
citing
buckley
see
brief
petitioners
according
plaintiffs
objective
seeking
disclosure
petition
prevent
fraud
publicly
identify
validly
signed
broadcast
signers
political
views
subject
petition
plaintiffs
allege
example
several
groups
plan
post
petitions
searchable
form
internet
encourage
citizens
seek
signers
see
app
brief
petitioners
plaintiffs
explain
internet
petition
signers
names
addresses
combined
publicly
available
phone
numbers
maps
effectively
become
blueprint
harassment
intimidation
support
claim
subject
reprisals
plaintiffs
cite
examples
history
similar
proposition
california
see
experience
one
petition
sponsors
case
see
app
related
contexts
explained
resisting
disclosure
prevail
first
amendment
show
reasonable
probability
compelled
disclosure
personal
information
subject
threats
harassment
reprisals
either
government
officials
private
parties
buckley
supra
see
also
citizens
slip
question
us
however
whether
pra
disclosure
violates
first
amendment
respect
signed
petition
particularly
controversial
petitions
question
instead
whether
disclosure
general
violates
first
amendment
rights
sign
referendum
petitions
problem
plaintiffs
argument
rests
almost
entirely
specific
harm
say
attend
disclosure
information
petition
similarly
controversial
ones
see
brief
petitioners
typical
referendum
petitions
concern
tax
policy
revenue
budget
state
law
issues
brief
respondent
wfst
listing
referenda
see
also
app
stating
recent
years
state
received
pra
requests
petitions
supporting
initiatives
concerning
limiting
motor
vehicle
charges
government
regulation
private
property
energy
resource
use
certain
electric
utilities
care
services
elderly
persons
disabilities
state
county
city
revenue
stating
past
years
referendum
measures
qualified
ballot
state
concerned
regulation
unemployment
insurance
charter
public
schools
insurance
coverage
benefits
voters
care
issues
quite
deeply
reason
assume
burdens
imposed
disclosure
typical
referendum
petitions
remotely
like
burdens
plaintiffs
fear
case
plaintiffs
offered
little
response
provided
us
scant
evidence
argument
beyond
burdens
assert
disclosure
impose
petition
signers
signers
similarly
controversial
petitions
indeed
little
plaintiffs
offer
respect
typical
petitions
washington
hurts
helps
several
petitions
state
subject
release
recent
years
plaintiffs
tell
us
brief
petitioners
apparently
release
come
without
incident
cf
citizens
supra
slip
citizens
disclosing
donors
years
identified
instance
harassment
retaliation
faced
state
unrebutted
arguments
modest
burdens
attend
disclosure
typical
petition
must
reject
plaintiffs
broad
challenge
pra
note
election
law
disclosure
cases
upholding
law
challenge
foreclose
litigant
success
narrower
one
see
buckley
supra
minor
parties
may
exempt
disclosure
requirements
show
reasonable
probability
compelled
disclosure
party
contributors
names
subject
threats
harassment
reprisals
either
government
officials
private
parties
citizens
supra
slip
disclosure
unconstitutional
applied
organization
reasonable
probability
group
members
face
threats
harassment
reprisals
names
disclosed
citing
mcconnell
federal
election
secretary
state
acknowledges
plaintiffs
may
press
narrower
challenge
count
ii
complaint
proceedings
pending
district
brief
respondent
reed
conclude
disclosure
pra
violate
first
amendment
respect
referendum
petitions
general
therefore
affirm
judgment
appeals
ordered
john
doe
et
petitioners
sam
reed
washington
secretary
state
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
ninth
circuit
june
justice
breyer
concurring
circumstances
law
significantly
implicates
competing
constitutionally
protected
interests
complex
ways
balances
interests
nixon
shrink
missouri
government
pac
breyer
concurring
practice
meant
asking
whether
statute
burdens
one
interest
manner
proportion
statute
salutary
effects
upon
others
ibid
read
opinions
justice
stevens
see
ante
opinion
post
stevens
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
reasons
stated
opinions
well
many
reasons
discussed
justice
sotomayor
uphold
statute
challenged
case
understanding
join
opinion
justice
stevens
opinion
john
doe
et
petitioners
sam
reed
washington
secretary
state
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
ninth
circuit
june
justice
alito
concurring
holds
disclosure
washington
public
records
act
pra
rev
code
et
seq
names
addresses
persons
sign
referendum
petitions
general
matter
violate
first
amendment
ante
agree
conclusion
many
referendum
petitions
concern
relatively
uncontroversial
matters
see
ante
plaintiffs
provided
reason
think
disclosure
signatory
information
contexts
significantly
chill
willingness
voters
sign
plaintiffs
facial
challenge
therefore
must
fail
see
ante
nonetheless
facially
valid
disclosure
requirements
impose
heavy
burdens
first
amendment
rights
individual
cases
acknowledging
reality
long
held
speakers
obtain
exemptions
disclosure
requirements
show
reasonable
probability
compelled
disclosure
personal
information
subject
threats
harassment
reprisals
either
government
officials
private
parties
buckley
valeo
per
curiam
see
also
citizens
federal
election
slip
mcconnell
federal
election
brown
socialist
workers
campaign
comm
ohio
compelled
disclosure
burden
ability
speak
citizens
supra
slip
seriously
infringe
privacy
association
belief
guaranteed
first
amendment
buckley
supra
exemption
plays
critical
role
safeguarding
first
amendment
rights
possibility
prevailing
challenge
provides
adequate
protection
first
amendment
rights
speakers
obtain
exemption
sufficiently
far
advance
avoid
chilling
protected
speech
showing
necessary
obtain
exemption
overly
burdensome
respect
first
requirement
exemption
becomes
practically
worthless
speakers
obtain
exemption
quickly
well
advance
speaking
avoid
possibility
disclosure
requirement
might
chill
willingness
voters
sign
referendum
petition
thus
burden
circulator
ability
collect
necessary
number
signatures
cf
meyer
grant
voters
must
assurance
time
presented
petition
names
identifying
information
released
public
way
circulator
provide
assurance
however
circulator
sought
obtained
exemption
disclosure
requirement
well
circulating
petition
otherwise
best
circulator
tell
voters
exemption
might
obtained
point
future
speculation
often
insufficient
alleviate
voters
concerns
possibility
subjected
threats
harassment
reprisals
cf
citizens
supra
slip
thomas
concurring
part
dissenting
part
additionally
speakers
must
able
obtain
exemption
without
clearing
high
evidentiary
hurdle
acknowledged
much
buckley
noted
unduly
strict
requirements
proof
impose
heavy
burden
speech
recognizing
speakers
must
allowed
sufficient
flexibility
proof
injury
assure
fair
consideration
claim
emphasized
speakers
need
show
reasonable
probability
disclosure
lead
threats
harassment
reprisals
ibid
emphasis
added
stated
speakers
rely
wide
array
evidence
meet
standard
including
specific
evidence
past
present
harassment
group
members
harassment
directed
organization
pattern
threats
specific
manifestations
public
hostility
ibid
significantly
also
made
clear
ew
groups
history
upon
draw
may
able
offer
evidence
reprisals
threats
directed
individuals
organizations
holding
similar
views
ibid
inception
therefore
exemption
imposed
onerous
burdens
proof
speakers
fear
disclosure
might
lead
harassment
intimidation
ii
light
principles
plaintiffs
case
strong
argument
pra
violates
first
amendment
applied
referendum
petition
consider
first
burdens
plaintiffs
first
amendment
rights
widespread
harassment
intimidation
suffered
supporters
california
proposition
provides
strong
support
exemption
present
case
see
buckley
supra
explaining
speakers
seeking
relief
disclosure
requirement
rely
evidence
reprisals
threats
directed
individuals
organizations
holding
similar
views
proposition
amended
california
constitution
provide
nly
marriage
man
woman
valid
recognized
california
cal
art
plaintiffs
submitted
district
substantial
evidence
harassment
suffered
proposition
supporters
see
declaration
scott
bieniek
wd
exhs
members
also
noted
harassment
see
hollingsworth
perry
per
curiam
slip
citizens
slip
opinion
thomas
indeed
evidence
relating
proposition
sufficient
obtain
exemption
case
one
may
wonder
whether
vehicle
provides
meaningful
protection
first
amendment
rights
persons
circulate
sign
referendum
initiative
petitions
plaintiffs
return
district
opportunity
develop
evidence
intimidation
harassment
referendum
supporters
opportunity
pretermitted
district
decision
grant
preliminary
injunction
count
plaintiffs
complaint
see
supp
wd
tr
oral
arg
example
plaintiffs
allege
campaign
manager
one
plaintiff
groups
received
threatening
phone
calls
threats
severe
manager
filed
complaint
local
sheriff
children
sleep
interior
room
home
app
inadequacy
state
interests
compelling
public
disclosure
referendum
signatory
information
confirms
courts
generous
granting
relief
context
see
buckley
supra
recognizing
weakness
state
interests
individual
case
require
exempting
speakers
compelled
disclosure
brown
notes
respondents
rely
two
interests
justify
compelled
disclosure
context
providing
information
voters
supports
referendum
petition
preserving
integrity
referendum
process
detecting
fraudulent
mistaken
signatures
ante
view
respondents
asserted
informational
interest
case
sufficient
trump
first
amendment
rights
signers
circulators
face
threat
harassment
respondents
maintain
publicly
disclosing
names
addresses
referendum
signatories
provides
voting
public
insight
whether
support
holding
vote
comes
predominantly
particular
interest
groups
political
religious
organizations
group
citizens
thus
allows
voters
draw
inferences
whether
support
oppose
referendum
brief
respondent
washington
families
standing
together
see
also
brief
respondent
reed
additionally
respondents
argue
disclosure
allows
washington
voters
engage
discussion
referred
measures
persons
whose
acts
secured
election
suspension
state
law
see
also
brief
respondent
washington
families
standing
together
implications
accepting
argument
breathtaking
accept
respondents
asserted
informational
interest
state
free
require
petition
signers
disclose
kinds
demographic
information
including
signer
race
religion
political
affiliation
sexual
orientation
ethnic
background
memberships
requiring
disclosures
however
runs
headfirst
half
century
case
law
firmly
establishes
individuals
right
privacy
belief
association
see
rumsfeld
forum
academic
institutional
rights
brown
supra
buckley
degregory
attorney
general
gibson
florida
legislative
investigation
naacp
alabama
ex
rel
patterson
indeed
state
informational
interest
paints
chilling
picture
role
government
lives
oral
argument
washington
attorney
general
balked
confronted
logical
implications
accepting
argument
conceding
state
require
petition
signers
disclose
religion
ethnicity
tr
oral
arg
respondents
informational
interest
legitimate
viewed
means
providing
public
information
needed
locate
contact
supporters
referendum
name
pursuing
interest
state
free
require
petition
signers
disclose
information
easily
enable
members
voting
public
contact
engage
discussion
including
telephone
numbers
addresses
internet
aliases
permitting
government
require
speakers
disclose
information
runs
current
associational
privacy
cases
important
speakers
faced
reasonable
probability
harassment
intimidation
state
longer
interest
enabling
public
locate
contact
supporters
particular
measure
instance
disclosure
becomes
means
facilitating
harassment
impermissibly
chills
exercise
first
amendment
rights
case
two
groups
proposed
place
internet
names
addresses
signed
referendum
alleged
express
aim
encourage
uncomfortable
conversation
supp
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
information
posted
internet
anyone
access
computer
compile
wealth
information
persons
including
many
cases
following
names
spouses
neighbors
telephone
numbers
directions
homes
pictures
homes
information
homes
size
type
construction
purchase
price
mortgage
amount
information
motor
vehicles
case
parties
information
posted
social
networking
site
newspaper
articles
names
appeared
including
things
wedding
announcements
obituaries
articles
local
papers
children
school
athletic
activities
potential
information
used
harassment
vast
respondents
also
maintain
state
interest
preserving
integrity
referendum
process
public
disclosure
furthers
interest
helping
state
detect
fraudulent
mistaken
signatures
agree
preserving
integrity
referendum
process
constitutes
sufficiently
important
state
interest
ante
harbor
serious
doubts
whether
public
disclosure
signatory
information
serves
interest
way
always
reflect
seriousness
actual
burden
first
amendment
rights
davis
federal
election
slip
first
realities
washington
law
undermine
state
argument
public
disclosure
necessary
ensure
integrity
referendum
process
state
washington
first
authorized
voter
initiatives
via
constitutional
amendment
following
year
washington
legislature
passed
statute
specifying
particulars
referendum
process
see
state
ex
rel
case
superior
thurston
significantly
washington
laws
pertaining
initiatives
referenda
authorize
public
disclosure
signatory
information
see
rev
code
et
seq
laws
pp
instead
public
disclosure
requirement
stems
pra
enacted
requires
public
disclosure
state
documents
generally
referendum
documents
specifically
see
rev
code
et
seq
indeed
anything
washington
referenda
initiative
laws
suggest
signatory
information
remain
confidential
outside
observers
permitted
observe
secretary
state
verification
canvassing
process
long
make
record
names
addresses
information
petitions
related
records
verification
process
state
required
destroy
petitions
fail
qualify
ballot
second
state
fails
come
grips
fact
public
disclosure
referendum
signatory
information
relatively
recent
practice
washington
prior
adoption
pra
washington
attorney
general
took
view
referendum
petitions
subject
public
disclosure
see
op
atty
pp
may
online
http
internet
materials
visited
june
available
clerk
case
file
declaring
public
disclosure
initiative
petitions
contrary
public
policy
run
contrary
tendency
part
legislature
regard
signing
initiative
petition
matter
concerning
individual
signers
except
far
necessary
safeguard
abuses
privilege
indeed
secretary
state
represents
web
site
even
pra
enacted
various
secretary
state
administrations
took
position
personal
information
petition
sheets
subject
disclosure
zylstra
disclosure
history
petition
sheets
online
http
although
secretary
state
apparently
changed
policy
late
appears
secretary
release
initiative
petitions
ibid
date
secretary
released
handful
petitions
ibid
app
history
substantially
undermines
state
assertion
public
disclosure
necessary
ensure
integrity
referendum
process
nearly
century
washington
referendum
process
operated
apparently
operated
successfully
without
public
disclosure
signatory
information
state
failed
explain
circumstances
changed
dramatically
recent
years
public
disclosure
required
third
experiences
demonstrates
publicly
disclosing
names
identifying
information
referendum
signatories
necessary
protect
fraud
mistake
give
one
example
california
initiatives
ballot
state
save
oregon
see
initiative
referendum
institute
initiative
use
online
http
nonetheless
california
law
explicitly
protects
privacy
initiative
referendum
signatories
see
cal
elec
code
ann
west
cal
govt
code
ann
west
thus
entirely
possible
state
keep
signatory
information
private
maintain
referendum
initiative
process
free
fraud
finally
washington
easily
cheaply
employ
alternative
mechanisms
protecting
fraud
mistake
far
protective
circulators
signers
first
amendment
rights
example
washington
attorney
general
represented
us
oral
argument
secretary
state
first
step
receiving
submitted
petitions
take
archiving
section
digitized
tr
oral
arg
digitized
list
relatively
easy
secretary
check
duplicate
signatures
referendum
petition
given
secretary
maintains
centralized
uniform
interactive
computerized
statewide
voter
registration
list
contains
name
registration
information
every
registered
voter
state
rev
code
ann
west
supp
secretary
use
computer
program
names
addresses
petition
names
addresses
voter
registration
roles
thus
ensuring
accuracy
legitimacy
signature
additionally
using
digitized
version
referendum
petition
state
set
simple
system
washington
citizens
check
whether
names
fraudulently
signed
petition
example
web
site
secretary
maintains
interface
allows
voters
confirm
voter
registration
information
simply
inputting
name
date
birth
see
http
presumably
secretary
set
similar
interface
referendum
petitions
indeed
process
seem
simple
given
washington
requires
unique
identifier
assigned
registered
voter
state
challenges
disclosure
requirements
play
critical
role
protecting
first
amendment
freedoms
give
speech
breathing
room
needs
flourish
prompt
judicial
remedies
must
available
well
relevant
speech
occurs
burden
proof
must
low
case
analogy
experiences
plaintiffs
strong
case
entitled
relief
able
pursue
relief
district
john
doe
et
petitioners
sam
reed
washington
secretary
state
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
ninth
circuit
june
justice
sotomayor
justice
stevens
justice
ginsburg
join
concurring
write
separately
emphasize
point
implicit
opinion
concurring
opinions
justice
stevens
justice
scalia
justice
breyer
assessing
countervailing
interests
stake
case
must
mindful
character
initiatives
referenda
mechanisms
direct
democracy
compelled
federal
constitution
instead
people
state
acting
sovereign
capacity
decide
whether
permit
legislation
popular
action
enjoy
considerable
leeway
choose
subjects
eligible
placement
ballot
specify
requirements
obtaining
ballot
access
number
signatures
required
time
submission
method
verification
buckley
american
constitutional
law
foundation
properly
recognizes
structural
decisions
inevitably
affects
least
degree
individual
right
speak
political
issues
associate
others
political
ends
anderson
celebrezze
instance
requiring
petition
signers
registered
voters
use
real
names
doubt
limits
ability
willingness
individuals
undertake
expressive
act
signing
petition
regulations
nature
however
stand
step
removed
communicative
aspect
petitioning
ability
impose
scarcely
doubted
buckley
concurring
judgment
part
dissenting
part
see
also
mcintyre
ohio
elections
contrasting
measures
control
mechanics
electoral
process
regulation
pure
speech
means
necessary
state
prove
reasonable
nondiscriminatory
restrictions
narrowly
tailored
interests
anderson
today
confirms
state
washington
decision
make
referendum
petition
signatures
available
public
inspection
falls
squarely
within
realm
permissible
regulations
cf
buckley
describing
state
law
requiring
petition
circulators
submit
affidavits
containing
names
addresses
exemplif
ying
type
regulation
may
adopt
public
disclosure
identity
petition
signers
rule
overwhelming
majority
use
initiatives
referenda
advances
vital
interests
reserving
integrity
electoral
process
preventing
corruption
sustaining
active
alert
responsibility
individual
citizen
democracy
wise
conduct
government
first
nat
bank
boston
bellotti
internal
quotation
marks
alterations
omitted
see
also
citizens
federal
election
slip
ransparency
enables
electorate
make
informed
decisions
give
proper
weight
different
speakers
messages
brief
respondent
washington
families
standing
together
reporting
one
state
exempts
initiative
referendum
petitions
public
disclosure
society
citizenry
final
judge
proper
conduct
public
business
openness
democratic
process
critical
importance
cox
broadcasting
cohn
see
also
post
scalia
concurring
judgment
noting
public
nature
federal
lawmaking
constitutionally
required
side
ledger
view
burden
public
disclosure
speech
associational
rights
minimal
context
observed
respect
regulations
disclosure
requirements
prevent
anyone
speaking
citizens
slip
comes
initiatives
referenda
impact
public
disclosure
expressive
interests
even
attenuated
disclosure
injects
government
otherwise
private
political
activity
process
legislating
referendum
inherently
public
qualify
referendum
ballot
citizens
required
sign
petition
supply
identifying
information
state
act
signing
typically
occurs
public
circulators
collect
submit
signatures
ordinarily
owe
signers
guarantee
confidentiality
persons
civic
courage
participate
process
post
opinion
scalia
state
decision
make
accessible
voluntarily
place
public
sphere
deter
engaging
expressive
act
petition
signing
disclosure
identity
petition
signers
moreover
way
directly
impairs
ability
anyone
speak
associate
political
ends
either
publicly
privately
given
relative
weight
interests
stake
traditionally
public
nature
initiative
referendum
processes
rightly
rejects
petitioners
constitutional
challenge
state
washington
petition
disclosure
regulations
considerations
also
mean
party
attempting
challenge
particular
applications
state
regulations
bear
heavy
burden
even
referendum
involves
particularly
controversial
subject
petition
signers
fear
harassment
nonstate
actors
state
important
interests
protect
ing
integrity
reliability
initiative
process
remain
undiminished
state
retains
significant
discretion
advancing
interests
buckley
likewise
expressive
interests
implicated
act
petition
signing
always
modest
find
difficult
see
incremental
disincentive
sign
petition
tip
constitutional
balance
relief
may
available
state
selectively
applies
facially
neutral
petition
disclosure
rule
manner
discriminates
based
content
referenda
viewpoint
petition
signers
rare
circumstance
disclosure
poses
reasonable
probability
serious
widespread
harassment
state
unwilling
unable
control
cf
naacp
alabama
ex
rel
patterson
allowing
invalidation
forgiving
standard
unduly
diminish
substantial
breathing
room
afforded
adopt
implement
reasonable
nondiscriminatory
measures
like
disclosure
requirement
issue
accordingly
courts
presented
challenge
regulation
authorizing
disclosure
referendum
petitions
deeply
skeptical
assertion
constitution
embraces
political
transparency
compels
conceal
identity
persons
seek
participate
lawmaking
referendum
process
understanding
join
opinion
john
doe
et
petitioners
sam
reed
washington
secretary
state
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
ninth
circuit
june
justice
stevens
justice
breyer
joins
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
hard
case
restriction
voting
speech
involve
classic
disclosure
requirement
rather
case
concerns
neutral
nondiscriminatory
policy
disclosing
information
already
state
possession
alleged
might
one
day
indirectly
burden
petition
signatories
burden
imposed
washington
application
public
records
act
pra
referendum
petitions
vast
majority
applications
substantial
state
given
adequate
justification
choice
number
reasons
application
pra
referendum
petitions
substantially
burden
individual
expression
first
regulation
pure
speech
mcintyre
ohio
elections
cf
prohibit
expression
require
person
signing
petition
disclose
say
anything
see
mcintyre
state
disclosure
alter
content
speaker
message
see
second
effect
speech
disclosure
might
minimal
pra
necessarily
make
difficult
circulate
obtain
signatures
petition
see
buckley
american
constitutional
law
foundation
meyer
grant
communicate
one
views
generally
regardless
whether
someone
signs
referendum
petition
person
remains
free
say
anything
anyone
time
disclosure
indirectly
burdens
speaker
amount
speech
covered
small
single
narrow
message
conveying
one
fact
one
place
watchtower
bible
tract
soc
village
stratton
cf
cox
new
hampshire
democratic
act
casting
ballot
signing
petition
serve
expressive
purpose
act
involve
interactive
communication
meyer
principally
method
individual
expression
political
sentiment
timmons
twin
cities
area
new
party
stevens
dissenting
cf
weighed
possible
burden
constitutional
rights
state
justifications
rule
case
state
posited
perfectly
adequate
justification
interest
deterring
detecting
petition
given
pedigree
interest
similar
regulations
state
need
produce
concrete
evidence
pra
best
way
prevent
fraud
see
crawford
marion
county
election
opinion
stevens
discussing
voting
fraud
nixon
shrink
missouri
government
pac
quantum
empirical
evidence
needed
satisfy
heightened
judicial
scrutiny
legislative
judgments
vary
novelty
plausibility
justification
raised
see
also
timmons
stevens
dissenting
rejecting
imaginative
theoretical
justification
supported
bare
assertion
enough
evidence
support
state
justification
see
ante
opinion
remains
issue
petitioners
challenge
matter
law
correct
keep
open
possibility
particular
instances
policy
pra
burdens
expression
public
enmity
attending
publicity
brown
socialist
workers
campaign
comm
ohio
speakers
may
winning
constitutional
rom
time
time
throughout
history
persecuted
groups
able
criticize
oppressive
practices
laws
either
anonymously
mcintyre
view
unlikely
occur
cases
involving
pra
burden
speech
petitioners
posit
speculative
well
indirect
challenge
law
pra
succeed
significant
threat
harassment
directed
sign
petition
mitigated
law
enforcement
moreover
character
law
challenged
referendum
affect
analysis
debates
tax
policy
regulation
private
property
become
heated
debates
domestic
partnerships
general
matter
difficult
show
later
disclosing
names
petition
signatories
individuals
less
willing
sign
petitions
past
demand
strong
evidence
concluding
indirect
speculative
chain
events
imposes
substantial
burden
statute
upset
upon
hypothetical
unreal
possibilities
good
upon
facts
pullman
knott
accordingly
concur
opinion
extent
inconsistent
concur
judgment
john
doe
et
petitioners
sam
reed
washington
secretary
state
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
ninth
circuit
june
justice
scalia
concurring
judgment
plaintiffs
claim
first
amendment
applied
fourteenth
amendment
forbids
state
washington
release
public
signed
referendum
petitions
submitted
state
order
suspend
operation
law
put
popular
vote
doubt
whether
signing
petition
effect
suspending
law
fits
within
freedom
speech
even
concludes
ante
long
history
practice
shows
first
amendment
prohibit
public
disclosure
repeat
extend
mistake
mcintyre
ohio
elections
neither
textual
support
precedents
requiring
result
invalidated
form
election
regulation
widely
used
since
end
century
scalia
dissenting
held
ohio
statute
prohibiting
distribution
anonymous
campaign
literature
violated
first
fourteenth
amendments
mcintyre
sought
general
right
speak
anonymously
referendum
plaintiffs
go
one
step
seek
general
right
participate
anonymously
referendum
referendum
petitions
subject
public
disclosure
public
records
act
pra
rev
code
et
requires
government
agencies
make
available
public
inspection
copying
public
records
subject
certain
exemptions
relevant
plaintiffs
contend
disclosure
names
personal
information
included
petitions
took
legislative
action
violates
first
amendment
right
anonymity
today
opinion
acknowledges
right
finding
denied
state
interest
preserving
integrity
electoral
process
ante
view
matter
judicial
nation
longstanding
traditions
legislating
voting
public
refute
claim
first
amendment
accords
right
anonymity
performance
act
governmental
effect
governmental
practice
become
general
throughout
particularly
one
validation
long
accepted
usage
bears
strong
presumption
constitutionality
mcintyre
supra
scalia
dissenting
washington
voter
signs
referendum
petition
subject
pra
acting
legislator
washington
constitution
vests
legislative
authority
state
legislature
people
reserve
power
approve
reject
polls
act
item
section
part
bill
act
law
passed
legislature
art
referendum
power
popular
legislation
exercised
submitting
petition
accordance
certain
specifications
washington
secretary
state
valid
signatures
registered
voters
number
equal
exceeding
four
percent
votes
cast
last
gubernatorial
election
rev
code
filing
referendum
petition
satisfies
requirements
two
legal
effects
requires
secretary
place
measure
referred
people
ballot
next
general
election
suspends
operation
measure
causing
effect
days
approved
election
art
see
brief
respondent
sam
reed
secretary
state
washington
voter
signs
referendum
petition
therefore
exercising
legislative
power
signature
somewhat
like
vote
bill
legislature
seeks
affect
legal
force
measure
plaintiffs
point
precedent
holding
legislating
protected
first
identify
historical
evidence
demonstrating
freedom
speech
first
amendment
codified
encompassed
right
legislate
without
public
disclosure
come
surprise
exercise
lawmaking
power
traditionally
public
public
nature
federal
lawmaking
constitutionally
required
article
cl
requires
congress
legislate
public
house
shall
keep
journal
proceedings
time
time
publish
excepting
parts
may
judgment
require
secrecy
yeas
nays
members
either
house
question
shall
desire
one
fifth
present
entered
journal
state
constitutions
enacted
around
time
founding
similar
provisions
see
ky
art
ga
art
desirability
public
accountability
obvious
votes
representatives
senators
congress
man
yet
bold
enough
vindicate
secret
ballot
vote
either
safe
wise
promotive
independence
members
beneficial
constituents
story
commentaries
constitution
ed
moreover
even
people
asked
congress
legislative
changes
exercising
constitutional
right
petition
government
redress
grievances
amdt
publicly
petition
read
aloud
congress
mazzone
freedom
associations
rev
petitioner
name
large
groups
involved
request
action
congress
taken
petition
consistently
recorded
house
senate
journals
see
journal
senate
june
journal
house
representatives
even
people
exercised
legislative
power
directly
anonymously
openly
town
hall
meetings
see
generally
zimmerman
new
england
town
meeting
petitioning
government
participating
traditional
town
meeting
precursors
modern
initiative
referendum
innovations
modeled
similar
devices
used
swiss
democracy
first
used
south
dakota
see
piott
giving
voters
voice
influential
advocate
initiative
referendum
analogized
swiss
practice
town
meeting
required
open
conduct
political
affairs
free
expression
opinions
discussing
sullivan
direct
legislation
citizenship
initiative
referendum
plaintiffs
argument
implies
public
nature
practices
longstanding
unquestioned
violated
freedom
speech
historical
support
claim
legislating
governmental
act
public
america
voting
public
began
adopt
australian
secret
ballot
see
burson
freeman
plurality
opinion
acknowledged
existence
first
amendment
interest
voting
see
burdick
takushi
never
said
includes
right
vote
anonymously
history
voting
completely
undermines
claim
initially
colonies
mostly
continued
english
traditions
voting
show
hands
voice
viva
voce
voting
burson
supra
evans
history
australian
ballot
system
evans
one
scholar
described
viva
voce
system
follows
election
judges
magistrates
sat
upon
bench
clerks
practicable
customary
candidates
present
person
occupy
seat
side
judges
voter
appeared
name
called
loud
voice
judges
inquired
john
jones
smith
vote
governor
whatever
office
filled
replied
proclaiming
name
favorite
clerks
enrolled
vote
judges
announced
enrolled
representative
candidate
voted
arose
bowed
thanked
aloud
partisans
often
applauded
quoting
wise
end
era
see
also
dinkin
study
elections
original
thirteen
dinkin
although
variation
election
official
ordinarily
compile
poll
name
residence
voter
name
candidate
voted
see
bishop
history
elections
american
colonies
bishop
argersinger
structure
process
party
essays
american
political
history
argersinger
prevent
fraud
colonies
rhode
island
new
york
new
jersey
adopted
english
rule
copies
poll
must
delivered
demand
persons
willing
pay
reasonable
charge
labor
writing
bishop
colonies
allowed
candidates
demand
copy
poll
required
legislature
examine
poll
contested
election
thus
case
government
publicly
collected
identifying
information
voted
candidate
also
disclosed
information
public
suggestion
viva
voce
voting
infringed
accepted
understanding
freedom
speech
first
amendment
text
refers
refuted
fact
several
state
constitutions
required
authorized
viva
voce
voting
also
explicitly
guaranteed
freedom
speech
see
ky
art
art
vi
ill
art
viii
art
surely
one
constitutional
provision
render
invalid
course
practice
viva
voce
voting
gradually
replaced
paper
ballot
thought
reduce
fraud
undue
influence
see
evans
dinkin
indication
shift
resulted
sudden
realization
public
voting
infringed
voters
freedom
speech
manner
occurred
suggests
contrary
adopted
paper
ballot
different
times
changed
methods
multiple
times
new
york
constitution
example
explicitly
provided
state
switch
methods
art
vi
kentucky
constitution
required
paper
ballots
art
iii
constitution
required
viva
voce
voting
art
vi
different
voting
methods
simply
reflected
different
views
democracy
function
one
scholar
described
virginia
kentucky
steadfast
use
viva
voce
voting
civil
war
follows
appeal
unflinching
manliness
polls
two
insisted
still
every
voter
show
hustings
courage
personal
conviction
schouler
evolution
american
voter
american
historical
review
see
also
virginia
close
affiliation
oral
expression
vaunted
privilege
voter
show
faith
outspoken
announcement
candidate
new
paper
ballots
make
voting
anonymous
see
evans
ballot
secret
argersinger
certainly
legal
provisions
ensure
secrecy
initially
many
regulate
form
paper
ballot
see
evans
argersinger
taking
advantage
political
parties
began
printing
ballots
candidates
names
used
brightly
colored
paper
distinctive
markings
ballots
recognized
distance
making
votes
public
see
burson
supra
evans
abuse
unofficial
paper
ballots
rampant
polling
place
become
open
auction
place
votes
freely
bought
coerced
burson
supra
employers
threatened
employees
party
workers
kept
voters
party
away
ballot
box
ballot
peddlers
paid
voters
watched
place
ballot
box
see
fredman
australian
ballot
story
american
reform
argersinger
thus
although
state
courts
said
voting
ballot
meant
secret
public
act
viva
voce
voting
although
state
constitutional
requirements
ballot
voting
held
guarantee
ballot
secrecy
thus
prohibiting
numbering
ballots
voter
identification
purposes
see
williams
stein
ind
brisbin
cleary
general
voting
ballot
means
secret
important
present
purposes
aware
assertion
ballot
secrecy
relied
federal
state
constitutional
guarantees
freedom
speech
precisely
discontent
nonsecret
nature
ballot
voting
abuses
produced
led
adoption
australian
secret
ballot
new
york
massachusetts
began
movement
almost
percent
followed
suit
burson
aware
contention
australian
system
required
first
amendment
state
counterparts
utterly
implausible
since
inhabitants
colonies
found
public
voting
entirely
compatible
freedom
speech
several
centuries
long
history
public
legislating
voting
contradicts
plaintiffs
claim
disclosure
petition
signatures
legislative
effect
violates
first
amendment
said
mcintyre
meaning
constitutional
text
freedom
speech
unclear
widespread
practices
american
people
best
indication
fundamental
beliefs
intended
enshrine
dissenting
opinion
practice
prohibiting
anonymous
electioneering
sufficient
reject
first
amendment
claim
anonymity
mcintyre
practices
public
legislating
voting
sufficient
reject
plaintiffs
claim
plaintiffs
raise
concerns
disclosure
petition
signatures
may
lead
threats
intimidation
course
nothing
prevents
people
washington
keeping
petition
signatures
secret
avoid
nothing
prevented
moving
secret
ballot
constitutional
basis
impose
course
upon
insist
today
opinion
avoided
demonstration
sufficiently
important
governmental
interest
ante
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
may
even
bad
idea
keep
petition
signatures
secret
laws
threats
intimidation
harsh
criticism
short
unlawful
action
price
people
traditionally
willing
pay
requiring
people
stand
public
political
acts
fosters
civic
courage
without
democracy
doomed
part
look
forward
society
thanks
campaigns
anonymously
mcintyre
even
exercises
direct
democracy
initiative
referendum
hidden
public
scrutiny
protected
accountability
criticism
resemble
home
brave
john
doe
et
petitioners
sam
reed
washington
secretary
state
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
ninth
circuit
june
justice
thomas
dissenting
onfidence
integrity
electoral
processes
essential
functioning
participatory
democracy
purcell
gonzalez
per
curiam
citizen
participation
processes
necessarily
entails
political
speech
association
first
amendment
view
compelled
disclosure
signed
referendum
initiative
washington
public
records
act
pra
rev
code
et
seq
severely
burdens
rights
chills
citizen
participation
referendum
process
given
burdens
hold
washington
decision
subject
referendum
petitions
public
disclosure
unconstitutional
always
less
restrictive
means
washington
vindicate
stated
interest
preserving
integrity
referendum
process
respectfully
dissent
case
concerns
interaction
two
distinct
sets
washington
statutes
first
set
codified
washington
election
code
regulates
referendum
initiative
process
statutes
require
among
things
referendum
signers
write
names
addresses
petition
sheets
mandate
information
disclosed
washington
secretary
state
canvassing
verification
see
petitioners
contend
requirements
violate
first
amendment
rights
argue
constitution
allows
support
referendum
measure
without
disclosing
names
state
second
set
statutes
pra
referendum
election
regulation
rather
pra
requires
disclosure
nonexempt
public
records
upon
request
person
see
washington
concluded
signed
referendum
petitions
public
records
subject
disclosure
pra
routinely
disclosed
petitions
response
public
records
requests
brief
respondent
reed
petitioners
challenge
constitutionality
pra
generally
contend
washington
violates
first
amendment
rights
construing
pra
apply
signed
referendum
petitions
see
brief
petitioners
notes
parties
dispute
whether
challenge
best
conceived
facial
challenge
challenge
see
ante
view
correctly
concludes
petitioners
must
satisfy
standards
facial
challenge
claim
relief
seek
reach
beyond
particular
circumstances
ibid
typically
disfavor
facial
challenges
see
washington
state
grange
washington
state
republican
party
often
rest
speculation
lead
courts
unnecessarily
anticipate
constitutional
questions
formulate
broad
constitutional
rules
may
prevent
governmental
officers
implementing
laws
manner
consistent
constitution
reasons
rejected
washington
state
grange
political
parties
facial
challenge
washington
initiative
allowed
candidates
primary
election
political
party
preference
primary
election
ballot
see
challenge
one
washington
opportunity
implement
initiative
political
parties
arguments
violated
association
rights
depended
possibility
voters
confused
meaning
designation
moreover
facial
challenge
inappropriate
regulation
face
impose
severe
burden
political
parties
associational
rights
considerations
point
opposite
direction
washington
construction
pra
face
impose
severe
burden
compelled
disclosure
privacy
political
association
protected
first
amendment
see
infra
referendum
signers
washington
several
opportunit
ies
implement
pra
disclosure
requirements
respect
initiative
petitions
washington
state
grange
supra
indeed
washington
admits
petitions
initiatives
referendum
recall
candidate
nomination
public
records
subject
disclosure
brief
respondent
reed
see
also
app
listing
six
completed
requests
disclosure
signed
initiative
petitions
since
washington
thus
eliminated
possibility
referendum
petition
signers
confused
state
respond
request
pra
disclose
names
addresses
washington
state
grange
accordingly
consider
petitioners
facial
challenge
purposes
case
assume
prevail
petitioners
must
satisfy
rigorous
standard
show
set
circumstances
pra
constitutionally
applied
referendum
initiative
petition
pra
unconstitutional
applications
quoting
salerno
ii
correctly
concludes
individual
expresses
political
view
signing
referendum
petition
ante
also
rightly
rejects
baseless
argument
expressive
activity
falls
outside
scope
first
amendment
merely
legal
effect
electoral
process
ante
yet
acknowledge
full
constitutional
implications
conclusions
expressive
political
activity
signing
referendum
petition
paradigmatic
example
practice
persons
sharing
common
views
banding
together
achieve
common
end
citizens
rent
fair
housing
berkeley
referendum
supported
one
person
signature
nullity
never
placed
ballot
doe
petitioners
recognized
much
washingtonians
see
ante
joined
petitioner
protect
marriage
washington
state
political
action
committee
organized
effect
protect
marriage
washington
major
purpose
collecting
enough
valid
signatures
place
referendum
general
election
ballot
app
pet
cert
reasons
signing
referendum
petition
amounts
protected
first
amendment
citizens
rent
control
supra
quoting
buckley
valeo
per
curiam
long
recognized
vital
relationship
political
association
privacy
one
associations
naacp
alabama
ex
rel
patterson
held
constitution
protects
compelled
disclosure
political
associations
beliefs
brown
socialist
workers
campaign
comm
ohio
constitutional
protection
yield
subordinating
interest
state
compelling
substantial
relation
information
sought
overriding
compelling
state
interest
internal
quotation
marks
citations
brackets
omitted
thus
unlike
read
precedents
require
application
strict
scrutiny
laws
compel
disclosure
protected
first
amendment
association
buckley
american
constitutional
law
foundation
aclf
thomas
concurring
judgment
standard
disclosure
requirement
passes
constitutional
muster
narrowly
tailored
least
restrictive
means
serve
compelling
state
interest
see
washington
application
pra
referendum
petition
survive
strict
scrutiny
washington
first
contends
compelling
interest
transparency
accountability
claims
encompasses
several
subordinate
interests
preserving
integrity
election
process
preventing
corruption
deterring
fraud
correcting
mistakes
secretary
state
petition
signers
see
brief
respondent
reed
true
state
substantial
interest
regulating
referendum
initiative
processes
protect
ir
integrity
reliability
aclf
washington
points
precedent
recognizing
correcting
errors
distinct
compelling
interest
support
disclosure
regulations
cases
strongly
suggest
preventing
corruption
deterring
fraud
bear
less
weight
particular
electoral
context
stage
referendum
initiative
drive
twice
observed
risk
fraud
corruption
appearance
thereof
remote
petition
stage
initiative
time
balloting
quoting
meyer
grant
similarly
eferenda
held
issues
candidates
public
office
risk
corruption
perceived
cases
involving
candidate
elections
simply
present
popular
vote
public
issue
first
nat
bank
boston
bellotti
citations
omitted
abandon
principles
merely
washington
amici
point
mere
eight
instances
fraud
see
brief
respondent
reed
brief
state
ohio
et
al
amici
curiae
among
initiative
measures
placed
state
ballots
country
see
initiative
referendum
institute
initiative
use
online
http
iri
visited
june
available
clerk
case
file
anything
meager
figures
reinforce
conclusion
risks
fraud
corruption
initiative
referendum
process
remote
thereby
undermine
washington
claim
two
interests
considered
compelling
purposes
strict
scrutiny
thus
persuaded
washington
interest
protecting
integrity
reliability
referendum
process
state
defined
interest
compelling
need
answer
question
even
assuming
interest
compelling
disclosure
referendum
petition
person
pra
blunderbuss
approach
furthering
interest
colorado
republican
federal
campaign
comm
federal
election
thomas
concurring
judgment
dissenting
part
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
least
restrictive
means
events
prompted
petitioners
complaint
case
demonstrate
much
washington
explained
oral
argument
secretary
state
receives
signed
referendum
petitions
first
step
take
archiving
section
digitized
soon
digitized
available
disks
anyone
requests
pra
tr
oral
arg
case
two
organizations
announced
intention
obtain
digitized
names
addresses
referendum
signers
post
online
searchable
format
ante
apparent
reason
washington
must
broadly
disclose
referendum
signers
names
addresses
manner
vindicate
interest
invokes
washington
possession
information
referendum
regulations
petitioners
challenge
see
supra
put
names
addresses
referendum
signers
similar
electronic
database
state
employees
search
without
subjecting
name
address
signer
wholesale
public
disclosure
secretary
electronically
referendum
database
statewide
voter
registration
list
contained
washington
statewide
voter
registration
database
ensure
referendum
signer
meets
washington
residency
voter
registration
requirements
see
presumably
drastically
reduce
eliminate
possible
errors
mistakes
washington
argues
secretary
might
make
see
brief
respondent
reed
since
allow
secretary
verify
virtually
signatures
instead
mere
ordinarily
checks
ante
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
electronic
referendum
database
also
enable
secretary
determine
whether
multiple
entries
correspond
single
registered
voter
thereby
detecting
whether
voter
signed
petition
addition
database
protect
victims
forgery
switch
fraud
ibid
washington
unique
identifier
assigned
legally
registered
voter
state
washington
create
web
site
linked
electronic
referendum
database
voter
concerned
name
fraudulently
signed
conduct
search
using
unique
identifier
ensure
name
absent
database
without
requiring
disclosure
names
addresses
voluntary
legitimate
signers
washington
admits
creating
sort
electronic
referendum
database
done
tr
oral
arg
implementing
system
place
heavy
burden
washington
secretary
state
staff
already
uses
electronic
voter
registration
database
verification
process
washington
nevertheless
contends
citizens
must
access
public
records
independently
evaluate
whether
secretary
properly
determined
certify
certify
referendum
ballot
brief
respondent
reed
ithout
access
signed
petitions
pra
provides
washington
argues
citizens
fulfill
role
final
judge
public
business
ibid
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
washington
election
code
already
gives
washington
voters
access
referendum
petition
data
verification
canvass
signatures
referendum
petition
may
observed
persons
representing
advocates
opponents
proposed
measure
long
make
record
names
addresses
information
petitions
related
records
except
upon
order
side
entitled
least
two
observers
although
secretary
may
increase
number
opinion
cause
undue
delay
disruption
verification
process
ibid
washington
explain
existing
access
petitioners
challenge
insufficient
permit
citizens
oversee
verification
process
decide
intelligently
whether
pursue
challenge
moreover
washington
implemented
narrowly
tailored
electronic
referendum
database
discussed
observers
see
secretary
state
employees
examine
data
using
exactly
techniques
use
data
released
pra
obtaining
digitized
list
navigate
computer
allow
observer
learn
additional
information
washington
law
also
contains
several
measures
preserve
integrity
referendum
process
first
crime
washington
forge
signature
referendum
petition
knowingly
sign
one
see
second
referendum
supporters
must
gather
large
number
valid
signatures
four
percent
votes
cast
governor
immediately
preceding
gubernatorial
election
place
referendum
petition
ballot
third
washington
required
referendum
petition
form
limits
petition
single
subject
see
fourth
large
warning
must
appear
top
referendum
petition
alerting
signers
law
requirements
see
fifth
washington
prescribes
text
declaration
circulator
must
submit
along
signed
petition
sheets
see
sixth
washington
prescribes
verification
canvassing
methods
see
dismissive
treatment
provisions
see
ante
perplexing
given
analysis
endorsed
aclf
held
two
disclosure
requirements
governing
colorado
initiative
process
unconstitutional
see
specifically
finding
warranted
state
interests
administrative
efficiency
fraud
detection
informing
voters
alleged
justify
emphasizing
judgment
wa
informed
means
colorado
employs
accomplish
regulatory
purposes
entire
last
section
opinion
detailed
less
problematic
measures
colorado
id
meet
substantial
interests
regulating
process
emphasis
added
one
exception
law
deeming
initiative
void
circulator
violated
law
applicable
circulation
process
colorado
laws
correspond
exactly
washington
regulatory
requirements
listed
see
including
observer
provision
provision
permitting
review
secretary
decision
certify
certify
referendum
petition
washington
thus
appears
provide
even
less
problematic
measures
colorado
protect
integrity
initiative
process
aclf
supra
see
reason
washington
identical
provisions
inform
analysis
readily
apparent
washington
vindicate
stated
interest
transparency
accountability
number
narrowly
tailored
means
wholesale
public
disclosure
accordingly
interest
justify
applying
pra
referendum
petition
washington
also
contends
compelling
interest
providing
relevant
information
washington
voters
disclosure
public
narrowly
tailored
means
furthering
interest
brief
respondent
reed
argument
easily
dispatched
since
already
rejected
similar
context
mcintyre
ohio
elections
held
ohio
law
prohibiting
anonymous
political
pamphleting
violated
first
amendment
one
interests
ohio
invoked
justify
law
identical
washington
interest
providing
electorate
relevant
information
called
interest
plainly
insufficient
support
constitutionality
ohio
disclosure
requirement
simple
interest
providing
voters
additional
relevant
information
justify
state
requirement
writer
make
statements
disclosures
otherwise
omit
underestimate
common
man
advised
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
people
intelligent
enough
evaluate
source
anonymous
writing
see
anonymous
know
anonymous
evaluate
anonymity
along
message
done
decide
valuable
truth
ibid
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
see
also
bellotti
inherent
worth
speech
terms
capacity
informing
public
depend
upon
identity
source
observation
applies
equally
referendum
measures
people
intelligent
enough
evaluate
merits
referendum
without
knowing
supported
thus
informational
interest
justify
ohio
law
mcintyre
justify
applying
pra
referendum
petitions
foregoing
analysis
applies
every
case
involving
disclosure
referendum
measure
supporters
must
petitioners
facial
challenge
succeed
see
washington
state
grange
quoting
salerno
washington
argue
strength
transparency
accountability
interest
rises
falls
based
topic
referendum
argument
convincing
basis
assume
washington
interest
maintaining
integrity
referendum
process
high
referendum
low
unemployment
insurance
referendum
library
referendum
likely
target
fraud
corruption
referendum
insurance
coverage
benefits
see
ante
strength
washington
interest
remains
constant
across
types
referendum
measures
strength
signer
first
amendment
interest
first
amendment
rights
issue
associational
rights
long
unbroken
line
precedents
holds
privacy
association
protected
first
amendment
see
supra
loss
associational
privacy
comes
disclosing
referendum
petitions
general
public
pra
constitutes
harm
signer
referendum
regardless
topic
sure
referendum
signer
may
willing
disclose
general
public
political
association
persons
signing
certain
referendum
measures
association
others
choice
belongs
voter
state
may
make
ascribing
lower
level
first
amendment
protection
associational
interest
think
voter
may
willing
disclose
cf
rosenberger
rector
visitors
univ
realm
private
speech
expression
government
regulation
may
favor
one
speaker
another
finally
less
restrictive
means
available
vindicate
washington
transparency
accountability
interest
employed
referendum
measures
regardless
topic
nothing
electronic
database
additional
observers
forgery
prohibition
existing
requirements
washington
law
help
protect
integrity
initiative
process
aclf
apply
equally
referendum
measures
strength
washington
interest
transparency
signer
individual
first
amendment
interest
privacy
political
association
remain
constant
across
referendum
topics
less
restrictive
means
protect
integrity
referendum
process
topic
specific
hold
public
disclosure
referendum
petitions
pra
narrowly
tailored
referendum
iii
significant
practical
problems
result
requiring
challenges
protect
referendum
signers
constitutional
rights
approach
require
substantial
litigation
extended
time
potential
signer
referendum
learn
whether
signs
referendum
associational
privacy
right
remain
intact
citizens
federal
election
slip
tenacious
litigant
reward
trying
protect
first
amendment
rights
interpretive
process
create
inevitable
pervasive
serious
risk
chilling
protected
speech
pending
drawing
fine
distinctions
end
questionable
slip
large
number
fine
questionable
distinctions
types
cases
reinforces
view
challenges
provide
hollow
assurance
referendum
signers
first
amendment
rights
protected
slip
thomas
concurring
part
dissenting
part
consider
examples
washington
referendum
sponsor
must
file
proposed
referendum
secretary
state
collecting
signatures
see
may
sponsor
seek
injunction
disclosure
challenge
filing
proposed
measure
simultaneously
filing
started
sponsor
able
present
evidence
specific
signers
potential
signers
particular
referendum
showing
reasonable
probability
compelled
disclosure
personal
information
subject
threats
harassment
reprisals
either
government
officials
private
parties
ante
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
thus
succeed
stage
litigation
plaintiffs
must
point
least
one
instance
harassment
arising
similar
referendum
never
held
evidence
acceptable
necessarily
means
signers
point
suffered
actual
threats
harassment
reprisals
engaging
protected
first
amendment
activity
sponsor
must
wait
least
started
referendum
file
challenge
still
unclear
sort
evidence
threats
harassment
reprisals
directed
toward
supporters
satisfy
standard
many
instances
threats
harassment
reprisals
must
signer
endure
may
grant
relief
challenge
dispersed
throughout
group
necessary
signers
see
ante
must
threats
importantly
standard
appear
require
actual
threats
harassment
reprisals
merely
disclosure
signers
names
addresses
lead
activity
ante
emphasis
added
sort
evidence
suffices
satisfy
apparently
relaxed
though
perhaps
elusive
standard
one
instance
actual
harassment
directed
toward
one
signer
mean
reasonable
probability
requirement
met
widespread
must
reasonable
probability
answer
questions
leaving
vacuum
filled
basis
doubt
result
drawing
arbitrary
questionable
fine
distinctions
even
district
circuit
judge
citizens
slip
addition
previously
explained
state
technology
today
creates
least
probability
signers
every
referendum
subjected
threats
harassment
reprisals
personal
information
advent
internet
enables
rapid
dissemination
information
needed
threaten
harass
every
referendum
signer
slip
opinion
thomas
thus
permits
citizens
react
speech
political
opponents
proper
undeniably
improper
long
plaintiff
prevail
challenge
ibid
apparently
disagrees
asserting
reason
assume
burdens
imposed
disclosure
typical
referendum
petitions
remotely
like
burdens
plaintiffs
fear
case
ante
conclusion
rests
premise
referendum
measures
benign
fact
public
chill
protected
first
amendment
activity
convinced
premise
correct
historical
evidence
shows
referendum
initiative
process
first
gained
popularity
means
provid
ing
occasional
safety
valve
interests
failed
get
fair
hearing
legislatures
cronin
direct
democracy
politics
initiative
referendum
recall
unsurprisingly
interests
tended
controversial
nature
early
examples
include
single
tax
prohibition
women
suffrage
prolabor
legislation
graduated
income
tax
proponents
initiative
measures
tended
include
politically
marginalized
groups
farmer
alliance
rural
housands
labor
federations
notably
miners
women
suffrage
association
saw
initiative
referendum
possible
new
means
overcome
repeated
failed
attempts
state
legislatures
secure
women
right
vote
characteristics
initiative
referendum
drives
persist
today
consider
example
goal
increasing
ethics
government
seemingly
laudable
unobjectionable
goal
thought
citizens
utah
frustrated
state
legislature
failure
pass
ethics
laws
commensurate
preferences
filed
initiative
target
ing
legislative
conduct
broad
array
reforms
significantly
change
business
gets
done
utah
capitol
hill
mckitrick
suit
demands
secrecy
ethics
petition
signers
salt
lake
tribune
apr
hereinafter
salt
lake
tribune
utah
law
provides
nitiative
packets
contain
names
addresses
cases
birthdates
petition
signers
public
delivered
county
clerks
verification
canvassing
utah
code
ann
lexis
supp
pamphlet
attorneys
sponsoring
initiative
moved
injunction
prevent
disclosure
initiative
packets
claimed
state
republican
party
said
target
folks
salt
lake
tribune
according
attorneys
facially
benign
initiative
may
well
result
political
retribution
retaliation
state
republicans
currently
hold
offices
governor
lieutenant
governor
attorney
general
state
treasurer
state
auditor
supermajority
utah
house
representatives
utah
senate
see
state
yellow
book
executive
legislative
branches
state
governments
spring
well
four
five
seats
state
delegation
congress
see
gpo
official
congressional
directory
pp
difficulty
predicting
referendum
measures
prove
controversial
combined
washington
default
position
signed
referendum
petitions
disclosed
thereby
allowing
anyone
place
information
internet
broad
dissemination
raises
significant
probability
today
decision
inhibit
exercise
legitimate
first
amendment
activity
respect
referendum
initiative
petitions
colorado
republican
thomas
concurring
judgment
dissenting
part
isclosure
requirements
enable
private
citizens
elected
officials
implement
political
strategies
specifically
calculated
curtail
activity
prevent
lawful
peaceful
exercise
first
amendment
rights
citizens
slip
thomas
concurring
part
dissenting
part
cases
long
recognized
reality
recently
reiterated
first
amendment
require
determinations
archetypical
first
amendment
rights
chilled
meantime
slip
chill
protected
first
amendment
activity
harms
others
besides
dissuaded
signer
already
expressed
deep
skepticism
restrictions
mak
less
likely
referendum
garner
number
signatures
necessary
place
matter
ballot
thus
limiting
ability
make
matter
focus
statewide
discussion
meyer
restrictions
inevitabl
reduc
total
quantum
speech
public
issue
ibid
public
pra
supposed
serve
thus
harmed
way
washington
implements
statute
petitioners
argue
constitution
gives
supporters
referendum
petitions
right
act
without
anyone
knowing
identities
thus
washington
requirements
referendum
supporters
sign
names
addresses
referendum
petition
information
disclosed
state
canvassing
verification
see
rev
code
issue
petitioners
contend
washington
citizens
may
never
obtain
access
referendum
data
thus
washington
rules
allowing
access
least
two
representative
observers
side
see
authorizing
courts
review
secretary
state
verification
canvassing
decision
observers
dissatisfied
secretary
decision
see
also
question
asked
assess
constitutionality
pra
regard
referendum
petitions
question
us
whether
signers
referendum
petitions
must
resort
substantial
litigation
extended
time
citizens
supra
slip
prevent
washington
trenching
protected
first
amendment
rights
subjecting
signatures
public
disclosure
view
need
footnotes
justice
scalia
doubts
whether
petition
signing
entitled
first
amendment
protection
post
opinion
concurring
judgment
skepticism
based
view
petition
signing
legal
effects
legislative
process
aspects
political
participation
respect
held
first
amendment
interest
see
supra
see
post
line
sharp
justice
scalia
recognizes
existence
first
amendment
interest
voting
post
course
also
legal
effect
distinction
becomes
even
fuzzier
given
petition
signing
legal
effect
legal
effect
attaches
well
expressive
act
signing
secretary
determines
petition
satisfies
requirements
inclusion
ballot
see
post
petitions
qualify
ballot
course
carry
legal
effect
justice
thomas
contrary
assessment
relationship
disclosure
referendum
petitions
generally
state
interests
case
based
determination
strict
scrutiny
applies
post
dissenting
opinion
rather
standard
review
concluded
appropriate
see
supra
footnotes
although
petition
classic
means
political
expression
type
petition
issue
case
merely
document
people
expressing
views
rather
forum
particular
function
sorting
issues
enough
public
support
warrant
limited
space
referendum
ballot
cf
widmar
vincent
stevens
concurring
judgment
washington
also
points
disclosure
policy
informs
voters
supports
particular
referendum
certain
contexts
informational
rationale
among
others
may
provide
basis
regulation
case
need
look
beyond
state
quite
obvious
antifraud
interest
reason
think
ordinary
presumption
political
branches
better
suited
courts
weigh
policy
benefits
burdens
inapplicable
case
degree
defer
judgment
political
branches
must
vary
degree
judgment
reflects
considered
decisionmaking
thus
law
appears
adopted
without
reasoned
consideration
see
salazar
buono
stevens
dissenting
slip
discriminatory
purposes
see
bates
little
rock
entrench
political
majorities
see
vieth
jubelirer
stevens
dissenting
less
willing
defer
institutional
strengths
legislature
one
may
call
question
process
used
create
law
reason
disregar
sufficiently
strong
valid
neutral
justifications
otherwise
nondiscriminatory
policy
crawford
reason
examine
carefully
justifications
measure
justice
scalia
conceives
issue
right
anonymous
speech
see
post
opinion
concurring
judgment
decision
mcintyre
posited
freewheeling
right
constitution
protects
freedom
speech
amdt
see
also
mcintyre
question
presented
whether
statute
prohibits
distribution
anonymous
campaign
literature
abridging
freedom
speech
within
meaning
first
amendment
freedom
burdened
law
exposes
speaker
fines
much
burdened
law
exposes
speaker
harassment
changes
content
speech
prejudices
others
message
see
right
however
right
speak
right
speak
without
fined
right
speak
anonymously
rare
case
may
also
arise
level
threat
individual
quite
high
state
disclosure
substantially
limit
group
ability
garner
number
signatures
necessary
place
matter
ballot
thereby
limiting
ability
make
matter
focus
statewide
discussion
meyer
grant
see
bates
little
rock
buckley
valeo
per
curiam
brown
socialist
workers
campaign
comm
ohio
buckley
american
constitutional
law
foundation
footnotes
plaintiffs
seem
disavow
reliance
mcintyre
ohio
elections
see
reply
brief
petitioners
certainly
differences
mcintyre
case
mcintyre
required
disclose
identity
placing
name
handbill
plaintiffs
object
signing
names
referendum
petition
presumably
observed
later
signers
challenge
later
disclosure
information
state
cases
public
disclosure
involve
claim
anonymity
first
amendment
anything
line
plaintiffs
seek
draw
seeks
sort
partial
anonymity
stranger
still
justice
stevens
quibbles
shorthand
use
tries
rein
mcintyre
holding
saying
create
right
speak
anonymously
ante
opinion
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
mcintyre
used
shorthand
see
right
remain
anonymous
freedom
publish
anonymously
see
also
ibid
author
decision
remain
anonymous
aspect
freedom
speech
protected
first
amendment
notes
petition
signing
legal
effect
ante
true
petitions
may
never
submitted
secretary
irrelevant
since
never
subject
pra
petitions
submitted
secretary
may
lack
requisite
number
signatures
even
petition
signer
exercised
portion
legislative
power
signs
petition
much
like
legislator
casts
losing
vote
quotes
republican
party
white
stated
state
sen
tap
energy
legitimizing
power
democratic
process
must
accord
participants
process
first
amendment
rights
attach
roles
ante
correct
point
white
involved
prohibition
speaking
condition
running
judicial
office
suggest
state
require
legislators
participate
referendum
give
first
amendment
rights
unconnected
act
legislating
electioneering
disclosure
cases
cites
ante
likewise
point
since
involve
disclosure
requirements
applied
political
speech
legislative
action
exception
parts
may
judgment
require
secrecy
assuredly
designed
permit
anonymous
voting
refers
details
whose
disclosure
threaten
important
national
interest
similar
clause
articles
confederation
created
exception
journal
requirement
parts
proceedings
relating
treaties
alliances
military
operations
congress
judgment
require
secresy
art
ix
constitution
requirement
broader
object
obviously
footnotes
generally
speaking
referendum
voters
approve
reject
act
already
passed
legislature
initiative
voters
adopt
reject
entirely
new
law
either
statute
constitutional
amendment
see
cronin
direct
democracy
politics
initiative
referendum
recall
washington
law
computerized
list
must
serve
single
system
storing
maintaining
official
list
registered
voters
throughout
state
must
contain
name
registration
information
every
legally
registered
voter
state
rev
code
see
permitting
secretary
state
verify
canvass
referendum
petitions
using
approved
statistical
sampling
methods
see
naacp
alabama
ex
rel
patterson
noting
hardly
novel
perception
compelled
disclosure
affiliation
groups
engaged
advocacy
may
constitute
effective
restraint
freedom
association
bates
little
rock
freedoms
freedom
association
purpose
advancing
ideas
airing
grievances
protected
frontal
attack
also
stifled
subtle
government
interference
see
also
black
douglas
concurring
first
amendment
rights
beyond
abridgment
either
legislation
directly
restrains
exercise
suppression
impairment
harassment
humiliation
exposure
government
emphasis
added