Yost wants lawmakers to change citizen-amendment process

(The Center Square) – Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost wants to change how Ohioans can get a constitutional amendment on the ballot.

Yost said he plans to work with lawmakers to alter the process that has stood for nearly 100 years after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to take up his appeal late Tuesday on a proposed amendment that would end qualified immunity for police officers and other officials.

“The attorney general’s office will work closely with the General Assembly on legislation to reform the ballot initiative summary process to protect the integrity of Ohio’s elections and freedom of speech,” a statement from Yost’s office said.

The court’s decision came after the Ohio Supreme Court unanimously ruled Yost was wrong when he rejected a summary of a proposed constitutional amendment to end qualified immunity titled “Secure and Fair Elections.” He also rejected it a second time with a title “Ohio Voters Bill of Rights,” calling it highly misleading and misrepresentative.

The court said Yost can only review the summary of the petition, not the title, and certify it as either a fair and truthful statement before it can move on to the next step in the process.

The amendment moves to the Ohio Ballot Board. It would end qualified immunity, sovereign immunity, prosecutorial immunity and other immunities provided to public employees or government subdivisions given to the state. It would allow for lawsuits with no limit on economic or noneconomic damages.

The ballot board must certify the proposal contains a single issue to move it forward to another signature-gathering process.

In December, lawmakers tried to tighten the citizen amendment rules by adding a provision that would allow the attorney general to consider the title of an amendment into a law dealing with online security.

That bill failed to pass as the two-year legislative session ended.

Lawmakers also attempted to change the citizen-led amendment process in 2023 with their own constitutional amendment that would change the number of votes needed to pass an amendment to 60%, rather than the current 50%-plus-one.

Voters soundly rejected that idea.