‘Disturbing:’ Supporters stunned to hear of failed legal effort to kill ballot initiatives

The Washington Supreme Court issued two rulings Friday dismissing related lawsuit appeals brought by organizations attempting to stop certifying the voter initiatives that were set for placement on the general election ballot in November.

In two separate cases, the groups sued Washington Secretary of State Steve Hobbs and sought to enact similar actions: challenging the process of certifying the signatures procured and seeking an injunction to remove the initiatives from the November ballot as Hobbs’ office reconfirms the signatures came from legal voters.

In the first case, Defend Washington and two voters sued Hobbs, challenging “certification of signatures on five voter initiative petitions,” according to the Washington Supreme Court decision delivered Friday.

“At issue in the appeal is whether the secretary permissibly certified the signatures on the sole basis that the signatures matched those found in the voter rolls,” the decision reads. (Readers can view a PDF of the court’s decision here.)

Sen. Mark Mullet after the primary: ‘I thought there were more moderate Democrats’

In the second and most recent case, the Washington Conservation Action Education Fund (WCAEF) and two citizens sued Hobbs for an order requiring Hobbs “to cease counting signatures for ballot initiative 2066 using present signature verification procedures.”

“Principally at issue is whether the secretary’s verification based solely on matching petition signatures to signatures found in the voter rolls is insufficient, and whether the secretary must also verify signers’ addresses, the decision states. (Readers can view a PDF of the court’s decision here.)

The decisions, both signed by Washington Supreme Court Chief Justice Steven C. González, both stated that, “An opinion fully explaining the court’s decision will be issued at a later time. ”

If the challenges had been successful, the citizen initiatives that would have come off the ballot included repealing the state’s capital gains tax (I-2109), ending its cap-and-trade program and repealing sections of the Climate Commitment Act (I-2117), making participation in a long-term care program run by the state optional (I-2124) and eliminating natural-gas restrictions in new construction projects (I-2066).

‘Disturbing’: Why supporters of initiative were surprised appeals got this far

Brian Heywood of Let’s Go Washington, the group formed to tackle these citizen initiatives, told another Seattle media outlet in an interview that he found out about appeals Friday, hours before the ruling and only because Washington State Standard reporter Jerry Cornfield reached out to his organization about documents he discovered.

In an interview with “The John Curley and Jake Skorheim Show” on KIRO Newsradio Friday, State Republican Rep. and Washington Republican Party Chairman Jim Walsh called the legal moves by these organizations “a terrible story” and “disturbing” as they sued Hobbs alone to have the initiatives removed and didn’t name others in the suit. That means they didn’t need to be informed.

“I, who was the sponsor initiatives, was not a party the lawsuit,” Walsh said. “Brian Heywood, and let’s go Washington, who were the main marketing, supporting signature gathering organization were not notified because they were not named in the lawsuit.”

KIRO Newsradio interview: Head here or click on the player below to listen to the chat with Rep. Jim Walsh

Walsh went on to explain the office of Washington State Office of the Attorney General Bob Ferguson never informed the potentially interested parties of the lawsuits, insulting the court maneuvering in the process.

Projection: Ferguson, Reichert to square off in state governor’s race

“The real shady part of this is that the state attorney general’s office, who normally would notify parties of interest in this kind of lawsuit, never said a word,” Walsh said. “So it’s very disturbing. Some would say it is unconstitutional, unprofessional, not kosher, whatever you want to say, it’s a very strange situation.”

Walsh did acknowledge the lawsuits weren’t illegal. He just believes that from an ethical perspective, mistakes were made since he wasn’t notified.

“Ethically and professionally and normal practice is that they would, and that never happened here,” Walsh said on KIRO Newsradio. “And it’s it’s egregious, in my opinion.”

That said, Walsh insulted the move of the “snow flakey radical left groups” to bring this type of action forward,

“It is so hypocritical, it’s hard to even talk about it, the idea that the same people scream and whine about saving democracy when they’re doing these incredibly undemocratic, sneaky, authoritarian, sleazy things,” Walsh said.

MyNorthwest politics: More stories and analysis from the primaries

Other reactions to the lawsuits about the ballot initiatives

In a statement sent to KIRO Newsradio and AM 770 KTTH Friday referring specifically to the WCAEF lawsuit about I-2066, Building Industry Association of Washington Executive Vice President Greg Lane said his organization was “pleased” the people who signed the petition “will have the opportunity to vote on this in November.” He also called called out the lawsuit as not democratic.

“These frivolous attempts to keep the voters from having a voice when it comes to energy choice are undemocratic and nothing short of voter suppression,” Lane said. “In essence, they are conceding through these desperate tactics that they know Washingtonians want energy choice.

Jackson Maynard, executive director and counsel of the Citizen Action Defense fund, offered his legal opinion to The Center Square about the development of the cases, calling it “really troubling.”

“In 22 years of legal practice, I’ve never seen a case progress this far without all necessary parties being before the court or at least being given the courtesy of a phone call about litigation as important as this,” he told the outlet.

MyNorthwest reached out to Defend Washington and the WCAEF for comments late Friday about the cases and has not yet received responses. Defend Washington did send a statement to the Washington State Standard, which called the decision “disappointing.” The organization reiterated that it had concerns, but it would abide by the ruling.

Steve Coogan is the lead editor of MyNorthwest. You can read more of his stories here. Follow Steve on X, or email him here.