State sued over proposed voting rights amendment rejection

The lawsuit asks the Supreme Court of Ohio to order Yost to reverse his decision and certify the petition.

The group has made several submissions to Yost, whose job is to certify that the submission’s summary and its actual text are in alignment before the petitions can be circulated. Most recently, Yost blocked the submission due to it being titled the “Ohio Voter Bill of Rights” — not necessarily based on the submission and the title being in conflict.

In his rejection explanation, Yost argued that recent Ohio Supreme Court decisions gave him the power to judge the submission based on its title, and that the proposal itself didn’t qualify as a “bill of rights.”

If Yost’s decision is upheld by the court, it would likely set a new precedent that would limit a proposed amendment’s self-promotional language in its petitions.

The amendment proposes a slew of access-enhancing election laws, including: an automatic voter registration system; same day voter registration or registration change; bestowing power onto local elections officials to expand voting access but not limit it; and establishing voting as a fundamental right in Ohio, among other things.

The Attorney General’s Office was asked for comment but did not respond in time for publication.

However, Yost took to X to soon after the lawsuit was unveiled: “We’ve been sued over this decision. Good. The misleading title is the only matter of contention, so we will likely get a clean opinion, up or down. The voters deserve a no-spin zone when asked to sign a petition, and I aim to give it to them.”