The Idaho Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected Attorney General Raúl Labrador’s challenge to a ballot initiative that would open Idaho’s primary to all voters and implement ranked-choice voting in the general election, saying the matter must first be heard by a lower court.
The decision means the Supreme Court will not hear oral arguments in the case.
“Today, the Idaho Supreme Court dismisses the Attorney General’s petition on procedural grounds,” the Supreme Court’s opinion said. “The allegations of petition fraud are serious. However, these allegations must be heard in the district court in the first instance. The Attorney General’s petition fundamentally misunderstands the role of that court under the Idaho Constitution and the role of the Secretary of State under the petition laws enacted by the Idaho Legislature.”
In late July, Labrador filed suit in the Idaho Supreme Court to prevent the Idahoans for Open Primaries initiative from appearing on the November ballot. The initiative has collected enough valid signatures to be eligible for the November 5 general election.
Labrador’s complaint argued that the signature gatherers did not adequately explain that the proposed ballot measure would establish ranked choice voting for general elections, thus deceiving voters. The attorney general also alleged that the measure violates Idaho’s constitutional requirement that initiatives can only be on one issue.
The organizers of the initiative have rejected these allegations.
Labrador had asked the court to either prevent Idaho Secretary of State Phil McGrane from placing the election title on the November ballot or to order McGrane to invalidate signatures in favor of the initiative.
The court ruled Tuesday that while the law clearly states that “signatures obtained by fraud are null and void,” the authority to determine whether fraud occurred rests with the district court, not the secretary of state.
The decision does not prevent Labrador from filing suit in district court to determine whether the signatures on the petition should be declared null and void for fraud.
Meanwhile, the question of whether the ballot initiative violates Idaho’s single-subject rule will not be “ripe for judicial review” unless it is signed into law.
“Whether the initiative violates the Idaho Constitution is not really in dispute at this time because the initiative is merely a proposal and has not yet become law,” the statement said.
A simple majority is required for the November vote. The proposal proposes two changes to the way most public offices are elected.
First, the measure would eliminate party primaries in Idaho and instead create a system in which all candidates compete in the same primary and voters can vote for all candidates. The four candidates with the most votes for each office would advance to the general election, regardless of party affiliation.
The measure would also lead to a run-off or ranked-choice election for the general election.
In this system, voters choose their preferred candidate and can then rank up to three other candidates in order of preference. Voters are not required to rank more than one candidate.
If, after the primary choices are counted, no candidate receives more than 50% of the vote, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and any vote for that candidate is diverted to the voter’s secondary choice. This process repeats until a candidate receives at least 50% of the vote.
