by Antoinette Grajeda, Arkansas Advocate
July 1, 2026
A federal judge on Tuesday declared unconstitutional state laws restricting Arkansas’ initiative and referendum process that are being challenged in court by ballot measure sponsors.
U.S. District Judge Timothy Brooks also allowed a handful of claims in the case to proceed to trial and left in place a preliminary injunction that temporarily blocked some of the challenged laws.
The laws Brooks declared unconstitutional imposed requirements including that canvassers request photo ID from signers and that paid signature-gatherers’ home addresses be provided to the state.
The 62-page order, which comes just days before the July 3 deadline to submit petitions to qualify ballot measures for the November ballot, stems from a federal lawsuit filed against the secretary of state last April by the League of Women Voters who argued several new state laws violated the U.S. and Arkansas Constitutions.
Judge issues injunction against Arkansas direct democracy laws
Two ballot question committees, Protect AR Rights and For AR Kids, were later allowed to intervene in the case.
The groups challenged additional laws not included in the original suit, including a law that prohibits ballot titles from being written above an eighth-grade reading level, and another law that mandates a minimum number of petition signatures must be collected from at least 50 counties instead of 15 as directed in the Arkansas Constitution.
The two groups are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas, whose legal director, John Williams, said Tuesday’s ruling reaffirms that the First Amendment protects Arkansans’ right “to organize, advocate, and engage in the political process without unnecessary government interference.”
“The court recognized that the state cannot burden core political speech with unnecessary restrictions that chill participation and make it harder for people to exercise their constitutional right to bring issues directly to the voters,” Williams said in a press release.
Spokesperson Jeff LeMaster said the attorney general’s office “will continue our vigorous defense of the State at trial later this month.”
A trial before Brooks is scheduled for 9 a.m. July 28 in Fayetteville. Brooks said he would refrain from entering judgment, including the permanent injunction, until all claims are resolved during the trial.
Among the laws Brooks said were unconstitutional Tuesday is one requiring petition sponsors to provide a list of all paid canvassers’ names and addresses to the secretary of state before canvassers can solicit signatures.
These lists are not exempt from Arkansas’ Freedom of Information Act, which was highlighted when the personal information of canvassers collecting signatures in 2024 for a measure to expand abortion access in Arkansas was shared publicly by an opposing group. Amendment sponsors decried the move as an intimidation tactic.
Brooks noted the state could have tailored the requirement to avoid the threat of public disclosure and its “chilling effect” by exempting this information from the state’s public records law while petitions are circulated. The requirement violates the First Amendment because it’s not narrowly tailored to serve Arkansas’ stated interests, he said.
“Doxxing is a 21st Century heckler’s veto, and the government should take care not to aid it,” Brooks said. “Arkansas has taken no such care here.”
While the state has a compelling interest to prevent petition fraud, Brooks said a law that requires canvassers to inform potential signers that petition fraud is a criminal offense is not narrowly tailored to serve that interest.
Arkansas has access to less restrictive means of addressing fraud by enforcing existing laws, but it hasn’t done so, according to Brooks who noted the secretary of state’s election director previously stated fraudulent signatures submitted to their legal team haven’t been pursued.
“Despite Defendant’s hand wringing about fraud, the State of Arkansas remains stubbornly disinterested in investigating and prosecuting wrongdoers, instead opting to heap additional burdens on the sponsors and canvassers who do comply with the law,” Brooks wrote.
In addition to these laws, Brooks also sided with ballot measure groups’ argument that the following restrictions violated the First Amendment:
- Requiring canvassers to request a photo ID from potential signers
- Requiring potential signers to read a petition’s ballot title or have it read to them
- Requiring canvassers to file a post-circulation “true affidavit” and prohibiting canvassers from collecting additional signatures until the secretary of state determines the sponsor is eligible for a cure period
Brooks also ruled in favor of the First Amendment challenges to a law that requires petition sponsors to reimburse the secretary of state for the cost of publishing notices about ballot measures in local newspapers, and to the challenge that a law prohibiting paid canvassers from being guilty of a qualifying offense.
First Amendment challenges to requirements for paid canvassers to be permanent Arkansas residents and a prohibition on paying canvassers based on the number of signatures obtained can proceed to trial, Brooks said. The judge will also consider at trial vagueness challenges to the photo ID law and the law requiring potential signers to read a petition’s ballot title.
Independent Journalism for All
As a nonprofit newsroom, our articles are free for everyone to access. Readers like you make that possible. Can you help sustain our watchdog reporting today?
SUPPORT
Arkansas Advocate is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arkansas Advocate maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Andrew DeMillo for questions: info@arkansasadvocate.com.
