Prete

Prete v. Bradbury Et

Good Law
438 F.3d 949
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 21, 200604-35285California11,197 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bea, J.

We are called upon to decide whether Oregon Ballot Measure 26’s prohibition of payment to electoral petition signature gatherers on a piece-work or per signature basis unconstitutionally burdens core political speech. Because the district court did not clearly err in determining that the plaintiffs failed to establish that the challenged measure significantly burdens speech, we cannot hold the Measure imposes a severe burden under the First Amendment. Therefore, because the defendant has established an important regulatory interest in support of the Measure, the plaintiffs have failed to prove that the prohibition violates the First Amendment.

I.

In November 2002, Oregon voters approved Ballot Measure 26 (“Measure 26”), a voter initiative, by a margin of 75 per cent to 25 percent. Measure 26 reads: 1863

Or. Const., art. IV, § lb.

Barbara and Eugene Prete and Jason Williams (collectively “plaintiffs”), as chief petitioners, later coordinated signature gathering to place various initiative measures on the February and November 2004 general election ballots. Oregon’s Elections Division office sent inquiry letters to plaintiffs in November 2003, advising plaintiffs that the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.