Whether the First Amendment prohibits a state court from enjoining a qualified initiative from appearing on the ballot because the court believes that, if enacted, the law proposed by the initiative would be invalid

QUESTION PRESENTED The Washington State Courts recognize this Court’s opinions applying the First Amendment to protect the circulation of signature petitions to put an initiative on the ballot for a direct vote of the people. However, the Washington Courts have authorized themselves to veto qualified initiatives from appearing on the ballot if the court believes the proposed law is “beyond the scope of the initiative power.” Washington Courts assert that there is no First Amendment protection for the subsequent political campaign, education, debate, and vote that necessarily accompany an initiative appearing on the ballot. Other state and federal courts are split on the question of the application of the First Amendment to subject matter restrictions on initiatives. Petitioner asserts that Washington Courts’ judicial veto cuts off the political communication of an initiative campaign and the people’s subsequent vote, which raises content-based, prior restraint, vagueness, and severe ballot access burden issues. Thus, the specific question presented is: Whether the First Amendment prohibits a state court from enjoining a qualified initiative from appearing on the ballot because the court believes that, if enacted, the law proposed by the initiative would be invalid.