Print  email 

tool name

close

tool goes here

Thurston judge keeps R-71 signatures sealed for now

• Published October 20, 2009

• Comments (0)

Judge Richard Hicks kept his Thurston County Superior Court order in place today that keeps secret the signatures and names of voters who signed Referendum 71. That's at least until the U.S. Supreme Court resolves what it is doing in the case, likely in a couple of months.

The high court announced today it is accepting a petition for a writ of certiori by R-71 opponents. In other words, the court will consider a review of last week's decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in California to lift a previous District Court order by Judge Benjamin Settle in Tacoma that had barred release of the signatures. Settle contended the release would threaten the right of anonymous political speech.

Depending what the high court does, Hicks could want more briefing on the state constitutional issues. Washington's state elections officials want to release the signatures for R-71, the "everything but marriage" bill that expands the rights given to same-sex couples and some seniors on the state's domestic partnership registry. The AG contends the signatures are a public record and therefore must be disclosed.

Protect Marriage Washington now must file a writ to the high court seeking the review, which its attorney James Bopp is expected to do. Protect Marriage is the group that sponsored R-71 and is now urging a vote against it.

Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy on Monday temporarily blocked release of the signatures, which activist Brian Murphy of Seattle wants so he can post names of gay-rights opponents online at whosigned.org. The court followed today with an order inviting the petition for review.

Bill Collins, deputy solicitor general for the Washington state attorney general, said it could be a matter of months before the high court resolves the issue. Timing will depend in part on how quickly Protect Marriage's lawyers file their motion with the court, Collins said after Hicks convened a short hearing today.

Shawn Newman, an Olympia lawyer representing professional initiative promoter Tim Eyman, last week asked Hicks to block the release of voters who signed 11 initiatives, nine of them sponsored by Eyman. Hicks at that time said the District Court order issued in September by federal Judge Benjamin Settle would prevent the signature release for initiatives as well as referenda.

Hicks repeated that concern today and agreed to let Newman amend his complaint to include reference to R-71 as well as the initiatives.

Hicks told the courtroom this case pits two rights: the right to voter anonymity and the right to public disclosure. "There are two competing principles, both very honorable," Hicks said.

Hicks noted that voting on a ballot is held to be a secret activity, but elections officials are allowed to check the identity of voters who sign initiatives in order to verify the legitimacy of the signatures. Yet at the same time, Hicks noted, elections officials and observers are not allowed to take notes about the identity of petition signers, and if there are too few signatures to qualify a measure for the ballot the petitions bearing signatures are destroyed.

The judge also noted that courts require disclosure of the names of political donors. The question is where the line is drawn.

Newman, an Olympia lawyer who is a state director of a national for Initiative and Referendum Institute based in Los Angeles, said the case has great legal significance beyond the fight at hand.