Petitioners filed application for Supreme Court to assume its original jurisdiction over challenge to sufficiency of Attorney General’s rewritten ballot titles on two proposed measures.
The Supreme Court held that mandatory language in ballot title asking voters for “yes” or “no” vote on proposed measures was not included in 200-word limitation.
Mandatory language in ballot title, asking voters for “yes” or “no” vote on proposed measure to amend statutes concerning criminal sentences, was not included in 200-word limitation for ballot petitions. Mandatory language was boilerplate and did not reflect character and purpose of proposed measure.