Bennett

This case presents a constitutional challenge to a vote put to the citizens of Hawaii on November 5, 1996. Plaintiffs ask us to invalidate the vote on the ground that the *1222 Hawaii Supreme Court’s interpretation of blank ballots was so unforeseeable that the voters’ substantive due process and free speech rights were violated. We reject this constitutional challenge and uphold the Hawaii vote.

I.

The vote at issue was on a question asking Hawaii voters whether they wished to hold a convention that would propose amendments to the Hawaii state constitution. The constitutional convention question was one of several unrelated items on the general ballot, including ratification votes on three proposed state constitutional amendments.

By way of background, amendments to the Hawaii constitution can be proposed either by the legislature or by a convention. Haw. Const, art. XVII, § 1. The Hawaii Constitution states:

Haw. Const, art. XVII, § 2. Amendments proposed by the convention must then be ratified by the people. Id. Pursuant to Haw. Const, art. XVII, § 2, voters were asked in 1966, 1976, 1986 and 1996 whether they wished to hold a constitutional convention.

Prior to 1996,…