Sponsor of ballot initiative instituting three substantive changes to Alaska’s election laws brought action challenging lieutenant governor’s certification denial based on finding that initiative violated constitutional requirement that proposed initiative bills be confined to one subject.
The Superior Court granted summary judgment in favor of sponsor and denied lieutenant governor’s motion for summary judgment, and entered final judgment for sponsor. Lieutenant governor and state’s elections office appealed.
The Supreme Court held that initiative embraced single subject of election reform, and, thus, initiative complied with Alaska Constitution’s one-subject rule.
Ballot initiative instituting three substantive changes to Alaska’s election laws, replacing party primary system with open, nonpartisan primary, establishing ranked-choice voting in general election, and mandating new disclosure and disclaimer requirements to existing campaign finance laws, embraced single subject of election reform and shared nexus of election administration, and, thus, initiative complied with Alaska Constitution’s one-subject rule, even if initiative could be split into separate measures, where all substantive provisions fell under same subject matter of elections, sought to institute election reform process, and changed single statutory title.