Meyer v. Grant
Headline: Court strikes down Colorado felony ban on paying petition circulators, protecting campaigners and groups who need paid workers to gather ballot signatures and speak to voters.
Holding: The Court holds that Colorado’s felony ban on paying petition circulators violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments because it burdens core political speech and the State failed to justify that burden.
- Allows campaigners to hire paid circulators to collect ballot signatures and speak directly with voters.
- Reduces risk of criminal liability for groups using paid gatherers to qualify initiatives.
- Limits states’ power to ban paid petition workers as a way to curb political speech.
Summary
Background
A group of Colorado citizens wanted to place a proposed amendment on the state ballot to remove motor carriers from the State Public Utilities Commission’s control. Colorado law required petition sponsors to gather many signatures within six months, to use only registered-voter circulators who signed affidavits, and made it a felony to pay people to circulate petitions. The sponsors said they needed paid circulators to collect enough signatures and sued state officials under federal law, arguing the payment ban violated their free-speech rights. A trial court upheld the law, but the Court of Appeals sitting en banc reversed, and the Supreme Court agreed with that reversal.
Reasoning
The Court explained that asking people to sign initiative petitions is core political speech because circulators must describe the proposal and persuade voters to support putting it on the ballot. Banning payment reduces the number of people who will circulate petitions, cuts the hours they can work, and shrinks the audience reached. The State argued the ban protected the integrity of the process and ensured grass-roots support, but the Court found existing safeguards and signature thresholds already addressed those concerns and that the State did not show the payment ban was necessary.
Real world impact
The ruling invalidates Colorado’s criminal ban on paid petition circulators and protects the right of groups to hire paid workers to collect signatures and speak directly with voters. It makes it harder for a State to justify criminal penalties that limit petition circulation and reinforces strong First Amendment protection for direct, one-on-one political advocacy.
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?