1. Single subject requirement
2. Procedure
3. Amendment by initiative
4. Miscellaneous
1. Single subject requirement
A preelection mandamus action claiming that a voter ballot initiative violates the single subject rule is a claim based on the initiative's procedural, not substantive, requirements and is thus ripe for resolution before the election. State ex rel. Wagner v. Evnen, 307 Neb. 142, 948 N.W.2d 244 (2020).
A voter ballot initiative violates the single subject rule when the initiative's first two subsections would enshrine a constitutional right of certain persons to produce and medicinally use cannabis, while later subsections would enshrine a constitutional right and immunity for entities to grow and sell cannabis and would regulate the role of cannabis in at least six areas of public life. State ex rel. Wagner v. Evnen, 307 Neb. 142, 948 N.W.2d 244 (2020).
Because the voter ballot initiative power is precious to the people, the Nebraska Supreme Court construes statutory and constitutional provisions dealing with voters' power of initiative liberally to promote the democratic process. State ex rel. Wagner v. Evnen, 307 Neb. 142, 948 N.W.2d 244 (2020).
Logrolling is the practice of combining dissimilar propositions into one voter ballot initiative so that voters must vote for or against the whole package, even though they only support certain of the initiative's propositions. State ex rel. Wagner v. Evnen, 307 Neb. 142, 948 N.W.2d 244 (2020).
The people's reserved power of the initiative and their self-imposed requirements of procedure in exercising that power are of equal constitutional significance. State ex rel. Wagner v. Evnen, 307 Neb. 142, 948 N.W.2d 244 (2020).
The single subject requirement may not be circumvented by selecting a general subject so broad that the rule is evaded as a meaningful constitutional check on the initiative process. State ex rel. Wagner v. Evnen, 307 Neb. 142, 948 N.W.2d 244 (2020).
The single subject requirement was adopted by voters to protect against voter ballot initiatives that failed to give voters an option to clearly express their policy preference. State ex rel. Wagner v. Evnen, 307 Neb. 142, 948 N.W.2d 244 (2020).
To meet the single subject requirement, a voter ballot initiative must satisfy the natural and necessary connection test, which examines the initiative's singleness of purpose and the relationship of other details to its general subject. An initiative's general subject is defined by its primary purpose. State ex rel. Wagner v. Evnen, 307 Neb. 142, 948 N.W.2d 244 (2020).
For purposes of the single subject requirement for voter initiatives under the Nebraska Constitution, the general subject is defined by its primary purpose. Christensen v. Gale, 301 Neb. 19, 917 N.W.2d 145 (2018).
The controlling consideration in determining the singleness of a subject, for purposes of the single subject requirement for voter initiatives under this provision of the Nebraska Constitution, is its singleness of purpose and relationship of the details to the general subject, not the strict necessity of any given detail to carry out the general subject. Christensen v. Gale, 301 Neb. 19, 917 N.W.2d 145 (2018).
Where the limits of a proposed law, having natural and necessary connection with each other, and, together, are a part of one general subject, the proposal is a single and not a dual proposition, and thus does not violate the single subject requirement for voter initiatives under the Nebraska Constitution. Christensen v. Gale, 301 Neb. 19, 917 N.W.2d 145 (2018).
Whether the elements of complex statutory amendments can be characterized as presenting different policy issues for purposes of the single subject requirement for voter initiatives under this provision of the Nebraska Constitution, the crux of the question is the extent of the differences and how the elements relate to the primary purpose. Christensen v. Gale, 301 Neb. 19, 917 N.W.2d 145 (2018).
The separate-vote requirement under article XVI, section 1, imposes the same requirements as the single subject requirement under this provision: A voter initiative or a legislatively proposed constitutional amendment may not contain two or more distinct subjects for voter approval in a single vote. State ex rel. Loontjer v. Gale, 288 Neb. 973, 853 N.W.2d 494 (2014).
The single subject test for ballot measures to change the law—whether the measure is a voter initiative or a legislatively proposed constitutional amendment—is whether the proposed law’s provisions have a natural and necessary connection with each other and together are part of one general subject. State ex rel. Loontjer v. Gale, 288 Neb. 973, 853 N.W.2d 494 (2014).
Under the single subject ballot requirement, the general subject of a proposed ballot measure is defined by its primary purpose. Without a unifying purpose, separate proposals in a ballot measure necessarily present independent and distinct proposals that require a separate vote. State ex rel. Loontjer v. Gale, 288 Neb. 973, 853 N.W.2d 494 (2014).
2. Procedure
In order to qualify for the ballot, a petition to amend Nebraska's Constitution must be signed by 10 percent of the registered voters of the state. State ex rel. Bellino v. Moore, 254 Neb. 385, 576 N.W.2d 793 (1998).
Article III, section 2, which refers to registered voters repeals the reference in article III, section 4, which refers to those voting in the preceding gubernatorial election. The number of signatures required for placement of an initiative petition on the ballot by the Nebraska Constitution is equal to 10 percent of the number of registered voters on the date the signatures are to be turned in. Duggan v. Beermann, 245 Neb. 907, 515 N.W.2d 788 (1994).
This section is satisfied by a filing on July 5 for a general election to be held November 5. State ex rel. Morris v. Marsh, 183 Neb. 521, 162 N.W.2d 262 (1968).
Provision that election on initiative shall be submitted at next general election is not mandatory. If court proceedings require, election may be at subsequent general election. Barkley v. Pool, 102 Neb. 799, 169 N.W. 730 (1918).
Initiative procedure did not constitute adequate remedy to correct existing inequalities in apportionment of legislative districts. League of Nebraska Municipalities v. Marsh, 209 F.Supp. 189 (D. Neb. 1962).
3. Amendment by initiative
An appellate court makes no attempt to judge the wisdom or the desirability of enacting initiative amendments. State ex rel. Johnson v. Gale, 273 Neb. 889, 734 N.W.2d 290 (2007).
The people of this state may amend their Constitution in any way they see fit, provided the amendments do not violate the federal Constitution or conflict with federal statutes or treaties. State ex rel. Johnson v. Gale, 273 Neb. 889, 734 N.W.2d 290 (2007).
In a case involving the people's amendment to this state's Constitution, the Supreme Court makes no attempt to judge the wisdom or the desirability in enacting such amendments. Duggan v. Beermann, 249 Neb. 411, 544 N.W.2d 68 (1996).
4. Miscellaneous
Statutory provisions authorizing initiative petitions should be construed in such a manner that the legislative power reserved in the people is effectual and should not be circumscribed by restrictive legislation or narrow and strict interpretation of the statutes pertaining to its exercise. Christensen v. Gale, 301 Neb. 19, 917 N.W.2d 145 (2018).
Provisions in a statute making it a criminal offense for a person to willfully and knowingly circulate a petition outside the county in which the person is registered to vote, and providing that signatures secured in such a manner shall not be counted, unnecessarily obstruct the people's right to participate in the initiative and referendum process and are therefore unconstitutional. A law which unnecessarily obstructs or impedes operation of the initiative and referendum process is unconstitutional. State ex rel. Stenberg v. Beermann, 240 Neb. 754, 485 N.W.2d 151 (1992).
Article III, sections 2 and 4, of the Constitution of the State of Nebraska set out some of the procedural requirements that must be met before an enactment initiated by a petition becomes a part of the statutory law of Nebraska or a part of the Nebraska Constitution. The people of Nebraska have specifically reserved the right to amend their Constitution themselves in sections 2 and 4 of article III and in article XVI, section 1, of the Nebraska Constitution. Omaha Nat. Bank v. Spire, 223 Neb. 209, 389 N.W.2d 269 (1986).
Legislature is authorized to enact laws to facilitate operation of the initiative power. State ex rel. Winter v. Swanson, 138 Neb. 597, 294 N.W. 200 (1940).