Reconsidering Arizonans: Proposition 8, Direct Democracy, and the Supreme Court

Frank M. Dickerson III
Reid Bolton

Abstract

The most interesting issue raised by the Proposition 8 litigation in California is the question of standing for ballot-initiative sponsors in defensive litigation and how courts should deal with these unique public “representatives”. This Article argues that ballot-initiative sponsors such as ProtectMarriage.com meet the relevant Article III standing criteria and should be allowed to appeal a district court’s judgments against the proposition. Standing for ballot-initiative sponsors is consistent with both the Constitutional and the prudential concerns underlying the doctrine of standing and allows the proper party to defend an initiative when the government chooses not to. Ballot initiative sponsors play a unique role within state politics and the Supreme Court should recognize as much.