US Supreme Court rules on Washington initiative signatures

People who sign initiative and referendum petitions may no longer expect their names to stay secret. The US Supreme Court ruled last Thursday that signing a petition is a public act.

The case in the Supreme Court came from last year’s Referendum 71 on gay domestic partnership rights here in Washington. The case sparked a debate between gay activists and the sponsors (Protect Marriage Washington) of the referendum as to who blocked release of the names of petition signers.

The nation’s highest court, however, has decided petitions are public records. The Supreme Court’s ruling was 8 to 1.

After the court case was resolved, Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna released a statement saying he was “gratified” by the outcome after personally arguing the case in front of the Supreme Court.

“They came down squarely in favor of transparency, of public disclosure, and for protecting the integrity of the election process in this ruling,” McKenna told the media after the decision was announced.

Protect Marriage Washington’s website says the Supreme Court’s ruling throws the decision of what to do with petitioner’s privacy back in to the State courts. The opinion allows Protect Marriage Washington to ask the District Court in Washington for an exemption from publicly reporting the personal information gathered of those who support traditional marriage.

Although the Supreme Court denied Protect Marriage Washington’s request to keep petition signers’ personal information private in all situations, the Court agreed with Protect Marriage Washington that people who sign a petition are exercising their First Amendment right to free speech and can act to protect their privacy when supporting traditional marriage.

The argument stems from the petition signers who said they wanted to hide their names because of worries of harassment or retaliation.

The Supreme Court left open the possibility of case by case exemptions from disclosure. In this case, a federal district court judge in Tacoma may examine whether fears of intimidation are justified before any petition names are made public.

The case will now return to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, where further proceedings will occur.