Backers of a proposed constitutional amendment to end gerrymandering have turned to the Ohio Supreme Court in their dispute with a state board over the description of the amendment known as Issue 1 that voters will read, which the backers call “biased and deceptive.”

Citizens Not Politicians (CNP), the coalition that wrote the proposed amendment and got it on the November ballot, filed the suit on Monday. The previous Friday, the Ohio Ballot Board approved a title and language to be printed on paper ballots describing the effect the amendment will have. CNP asked the Ohio Supreme Court to order the Ballot Board to adopt language that “properly identif[ies] the substance of the proposal to be voted upon” and does not “mislead, deceive, or defraud” voters, as the state constitution requires.

“So, let’s be blunt about what is happening here: Politicians do not wish to give up power, they oppose the Amendment, and they’re using control of the Ballot Board to try to influence voters with ballot language so farcically biased and deceptive that it approaches comedy,” the CNP complaint states. “The Ballot Board’s duty is clear, the legal standards well-defined, and the ballot title and language before the Court flagrantly violate those standards.”

Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose, who chairs the Ballot Board, is reviewing the lawsuit and will respond, spokesman Dan Luschek said on Tuesday.

“The summary approved by the ballot board is fair and factual,” Luschek said. “It accurately identifies the substance of the amendment being voted on, and Ohio voters deserve truth and transparency when being asked to rewrite substantial portions of our state’s founding document. That’s what the approved summary provides.”

🗳️For more on this year’s November election, visit our Election Signals 2024 page.

Issue 1 proposes changing who draws new districts

The amendment is intended to end gerrymandering in Ohio, the practice of drawing political district boundaries in ways that benefit one party over another.  Supporters of the amendment say that Ohio Republicans have used gerrymandering to build their supermajorities in the State House of Representatives and State Senate, and to help Republicans win more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. Most registered voters in Ohio are considered “unaffiliated” with a party.

The amendment would replace the Ohio Redistricting Commission, which is made up of people appointed by political leaders, with a new commission “made up of Democratic, Republican, and Independent citizens who broadly represent the different geographic areas and demographics of the state.” Current and former politicians, political party officials and lobbyists would be barred from participating.

Getting a proposed amendment on the ballot is a long process. On Friday, CNP’s amendment reached the last step, a hearing before the Ohio Ballot Board. The board’s role includes reviewing the ballot language — the summary of the amendment that will be printed on the paper ballots for voters to read — to ensure that it fairly and accurately reflects the amendment’s effect.

The Ballot Board is made up of three Republicans and two Democrats. At Friday’s hearing, the Democratic members suggested adopting ballot language proposed by CNP (read it here). But the Republicans voted that down and instead adopted the much longer summary prepared by LaRose’s staff that’s now headed to the Ohio Supreme Court.

‘Incurably and wholly tainted’

CNP’s complaint to the court provides examples of the board’s alleged deceptions.

• “The adopted ballot language, directly contradicting the text of the proposed amendment, says that the Amendment would instead “[e]stablish a new taxpayer funded commission of appointees required to gerrymander the boundaries of state legislative and congressional districts …” (emphasis added).

• The adopted ballot language “falsely claims that the Amendment would “[r]equire that a majority of the partisan commission members belong to the state’s two largest political parties.”

• The language “falsely” claims that Issue 1 would “limit the right of Ohio citizens to freely express their opinions to members of the commission” and strictly limit the ways in which citizens could challenge commission decisions in court.

“Because both the title and language embody a brazen effort to mislead and sway voters, they are incurably and wholly tainted,” the CNP complaint states.

CNP and LaRose agree on one thing: that the Ohio Supreme Court needs to act quickly.

“Military ballots begin going out in about four weeks, and early absentee voting begins in less than 50 days,” said Luschek, LaRose’s spokesperson.