U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Hill, 93-1240
| Decision Date | 07 March 1994 |
| Docket Number | No. 93-1240,93-1240 |
| Parties | , 62 USLW 2586 U.S. TERM LIMITS, INC., et al., Appellants, v. Bobbie E. HILL, et al., Appellees. |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
John G. Kester, Terrence O'Donnell, Timothy D. Zick, Washington, DC, H. William Allen, Little Rock, for U.S. Term Limits, Inc.
John T. Harmon for Americans for Term Limits and Steve Goss.
Nancy Bellhouse May, Maumelle, Karen J. Garnett, Judy M. Robinson, Little Rock, for
Geo. O. Jernigan, Jr. and the Democratic Party of Arkansas.
Richard F. Hatfield, Little Rock, Atty. Gen., Winston Bryant, for State of Arkansas.
James F. Lane, Little Rock, Cleta Deatherage Mitchell, Washington, DC, Frank J. Wills, III, Little Rock, for Arkansas for Governmental Reform.
Doyle L. Webb, Benton, W. Asa Hutchinson, Fort Smith, for Republican Party of Arkansas.
Stephen Engstrom, Little Rock, for Unified Members of Legislature.
Elizabeth J. Robben, Robert S. Shafer, Jeffrey H. Moore, Little Rock, for cross-appellants Bobbie E. Hill and Dick Herget.
Sherry P. Bartley, Little Rock, for Ray Thornton.
Elizabeth J. Robben, Robert S. Shafer, Jeffrey H. Moore, Little Rock, for appellees' Bobbie E. Hill and Dick Herget.
This case concerns the validity of Amendment 73 to the Arkansas Constitution, which establishes limitations on the number of terms that can be served by state constitutional officers, and state legislators, and limitations on the eligibility of candidates for the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives to have their names placed on the election ballot. Amendment 73 was proposed as an initiated petition by the people of the State under Amendment 7 of the Arkansas Constitution and approved in the General Election on November 3, 1992, by a vote of 494,326 to 330,836.
The proposal, as it appeared on the ballot and was voted on at the General Election, read as follows:
PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT NO. 4
()
(Popular Name)
ARKANSAS TERM LIMITATION AMENDMENT
(Ballot Title)
An Amendment to the Constitution of the State of Arkansas limiting the number of terms that may be served by the elected officials of the Executive Department of this state to two (2) four-year terms, this department to consist of a Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State, Treasurer of State, Auditor of State, Attorney General, Commissioner of State Lands; limiting the number of terms that may be served by members of the Arkansas House of Representatives to three (3) two-year terms, these members to be chosen every second year; limiting the number of terms that may be served by members of the Arkansas Senate to two (2) four-year terms, these members to be chosen every four years; providing that any person having been elected to three (3) or more terms as a member of the United States House of Representatives from Arkansas shall not be eligible to appear on the ballot for election to the United States House of Representatives from Arkansas; providing that any person having been elected to two (2) or more terms as a member for the United States Senate from Arkansas shall not be eligible to appear on the ballot for election to the United States Senate from Arkansas; providing for an effective date of January 1, 1993; and making the provisions applicable to all persons thereafter seeking election to the specified offices.
FOR Proposed Constitutional Amendment No. 4 [ ]
AGAINST Proposed Constitutional Amendment No. 4 [ ]
The text and description of the full Amendment which were published and included in the initiative petition but not on the ballot read:
SUMMARY:
This amendment provides a limit of two (2) terms for the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State, Treasurer of State, Auditor of State, Attorney General and Commissioner of State Lands. It provides a limit of three (3) terms for State Representatives, and a limit of two (2) terms for State Senators. It also provides that persons having been elected three (3) or more terms as a member of the United States House of Representatives from Arkansas shall not be eligible to appear on the ballot for election to the United States House of Representatives from Arkansas. Lastly, it provides that any person having been elected to two (2) or more terms as a member of the United States Senate from Arkansas shall not be eligible to appear on the ballot for election to the United States Senate from Arkansas.
PREAMBLE:
The people of Arkansas find and declare that elected officials who remain in office too long become preoccupied with reelection and ignore their duties as representatives of the people. Entrenched incumbency has reduced voter participation and has led to an electoral system that is less free, less competitive, and less representative than the system established by the Founding Fathers. Therefore, the people of Arkansas, exercising their reserved powers, herein limit the terms of the elected officials.
(a) The Executive Department of the State shall consist of a Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State, Treasurer of State, Auditor of State, Attorney General, and Commissioner of State Lands, all of whom shall keep their offices at the seat of government, and hold their offices for the term of four years, and until their successors are elected and qualified.
(b) No elected officials of the Executive Department of this State may serve in the same office more than two such four-year terms.
(a) The Arkansas House of Representatives shall consist of members to be chosen every second year by the qualified electors of the several counties. No member of the Arkansas House of Representatives may serve more than three such two year terms.
(b) The Arkansas Senate shall consist of members to be chosen every four years by the qualified electors of the several districts. No member of the Arkansas Senate may serve more than two such four-year terms.
(a) Any person having been elected to three or more terms as a member of the United States House of Representatives from Arkansas shall not be certified as a candidate and shall not be eligible to have his/her name placed on the ballot for election to the United States House of Representatives from Arkansas.
(b) Any person having been elected to two or more terms as a member of the United States Senate from Arkansas shall not be certified as a candidate and shall not be eligible to have his/her name placed on the ballot for election to the United States Senate from Arkansas.
The provisions of this Amendment are severable, and if any should be held invalid, the remainder shall stand.
Provisions of the Amendment shall be self-executing.
(a) This Amendment to the Arkansas Constitution shall take effect and be in operation on January 1, 1993, and its provisions shall be applicable to all persons thereafter seeking election to the offices specified in this Amendment.
(b) All laws and constitutional provisions which conflict with this Amendment are hereby repealed to the extent that they conflict with this amendment.
The text of the entire Amendment was published prior to the election as required by law. Ark. Const. amend. 7. "Initiative;" Ark.Code Ann. § 7-9-113 (1987).
On November 13, 1992, appellees Bobbie Hill on behalf of herself and the League of Women Voters of Arkansas filed a complaint for declaratory judgment in Pulaski County Circuit Court seeking to invalidate Amendment 73 on several grounds: (1) the Amendment violates Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution by adding an additional qualification for election to the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate; (2) the sections of the Amendment are inherently nonseverable and the unconstitutionality of section 3 voids the entire Amendment; (3) the Amendment did not contain an Enacting Clause in violation of Amendment 7 of the Arkansas Constitution.
The original defendants named in the complaint were incumbent State constitutional officers and legislators, U.S. senators and representatives currently in office, the State Democratic Party, the State Republican Party, and the State Board of Election Commissioners. Many of the incumbent State legislators combined their efforts in this matter under the title of Unified Members. Thereafter, other parties intervened. The State of Arkansas through the State Attorney General's office intervened as a party defendant and was joined by various organizations that were proponents of the Amendment: U.S. Term Limits, Inc., Arkansans for Governmental Reform, and Americans for Term Limits, as well as their representatives. An Amended Complaint was subsequently filed adding Dick Herget, a political supporter of U.S. Congressman Ray Thornton, who has previously served three terms in the U.S. House of Representatives, as a party plaintiff. Plaintiff/appellee Bobbie Hill was described as a political supporter of State Representative John Dawson, who has previously served seven terms in the State House of Representatives.
Appellees Hill and Herget joined by U.S. Congressman Ray Thornton and the State Democratic Party moved for summary judgment to void Amendment 73 in accordance with the Amended Complaint. The Unified Members filed a similar motion. The State of Arkansas and Arkansans for Governmental Reform moved to Dismiss the complaint for lack of justiciability. Intervenor U.S. Term Limits moved for summary judgment on grounds that Amendment 73 was valid in all respects.
A hearing ensued on July 29, 1993, and the circuit court handed down its Conclusions of Law that same date which are summarized:
1. The matter is justiciable based on the adverse impact of Amendment 73 on incumbent officeholders and on appellees Hill's and Herget's right to participate in the political process.
2. The omission...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hopkins v. Jegley
...by the act; and (2) whether the sections of the act are interrelated and dependent upon each other." U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Hill , 316 Ark. 251, 872 S.W.2d 349, 357 (1994). Applying this standard, the Court satisfies itself that this type of challenge solely to the Medical Records Mandat......
-
Little Rock Family Planning Servs. v. Rutledge
...by the act; and (2) whether the sections of the act are interrelated and dependent upon each other." U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Hill , 316 Ark. 251, 872 S.W.2d 349, 357 (1994). Applying this standard, the Court satisfies itself that, under the law, an examination of Act 619 with respect to p......
-
Bates v. Jones
...Judges Assn. v. Lau, 112 Nev. 51, 910 P.2d 898, 902-03 (1996) (upholding lifetime judicial term limits); U.S. Term Limits v. Hill, 316 Ark. 251, 872 S.W.2d 349, 359-60 (1994), aff'd on other grounds, 514 U.S. 779, 115 S.Ct. 1842, 131 L.Ed.2d 881 (1995) (upholding lifetime legislative term l......
-
Little Rock Family Planning Services v. Dalton, LR-C-93-803.
...presence of a severability clause is a factor to be considered but, by itself, it may not be determinative." U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Hill, 316 Ark. 251, 266, 872 S.W.2d 349 (1994)). In Bates, the Supreme Court struck down the Domestic Abuse Act, which had no severability clause, despite t......
-
The aftermath of Thornton.
...to term limits imposed on state legislative officials). (3.) 115 S. Ct. 1842 (1995), aff'g sub nom U. S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Hill, 872 S.W.2d 349 (Ark. 1994). See Ronald D. Rotunda, Rethinking Term Limits for Federal Legislators . in Light of the Structure of the Constitution, 73 Or. L. Re......
-
Term limits, the state courts, and national dominion: the vicissitudes of American federalism.
...id. at 126. (34) Id. at 132 (Steffen, J., dissenting). (35) Id. at 129. (36) See id. (37) See id. at 130. (38) See id. at 131-32. (39) 872 S.W.2d 349 (Ark. (40) See id. at 356-57. (41) U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 115 S. Ct. 1842 (1995). (42) 514 U.S. 779 (1995). (43) See id. at 828.......