Montanans for Justice Ask Courts To Uphold Integrity of Montana's Initiative Process Legal Action A legal action was filed in state district court in Great Falls Tuesday, August 15, 2006 asking the court to throw out the signatures obtained by professional signature gatherers for CI-98, CI-97 and I-154. Plaintiffs bringing the action were: Montanans for Justice: Vote No on CI-98, a registered political ballot committee with offices in Great Falls; Not in Montana: Citizens Against CI-97; and, Property Owners Against I-154. Plaintiffs alleged in their complaint that the defendant committees "utilized paid signature gatherers" and that the "defendants were responsible for the signature gatherers' efforts and were aware of their illegal and deceptive practices, but failed to exercise reasonable care to assure the integrity of the initiative process." Montanans For Justice Press Release The Complaint and Brief in support of motion for expedited hearing set forth the factual allegations and legal basis for the suit. Hearing & Order A hearing was held in Great Falls on September 8, 2006. District Court Judge Dirk Sandefur issued his order September 13, 2006. Citing "a pervasive and general pattern and practice of fraud and procedural non-compliance perpetrated by paid, out of state, migrant signature gatherers commissioned by Proponents," Judge Sandefur's order invalidates all the signatures gathered by out of state paid signature gatherers. The order further provides that "the Secretary of State's certifications of CI 97, CI-98, and I-154 pursuant to §§ 13-27-307, 13-27-308, 13-27-311, and 13-27-312, MCA, are hereby invalidated." Montanans For Justice press release. Excerpts From Order Fraud "[T]he 2006 signature gathering process under Title 13, Chapter, 27, MCA, for CI-97, CI-98, and I-154 is permeated by a pervasive and general pattern and practice of fraud and procedural non-compliance perpetrated by paid, out of state, migrant signature gatherers commissioned by Proponents;" Proof "In contrast, the Proponents presented no credible evidence to rebut Plaintiffs' showing of a pervasive and general pattern and practice of fraud and conscious circumvention of procedural safeguards. As the parties who commissioned the professional migrant signature gatherers, the Proponents should have been in the best position to contact their signature gatherers and bring a sufficient number of them into court to rebut the Plaintiffs' showing of fraud and irregularity. However, either because they were unwilling or themselves unable to locate them, Proponents failed to present any direct evidence from the best and most knowledgeable source to rebut Plaintiffs' showing." Voters' Rights "As recognized by other courts, and contrary to the politically-provocative rhetoric that is certain to follow, invalidation of the signature gathering process does not result in disenfranchisement of the people who support the Ballot Initiatives. As a matter of law and reason, the people who support the initiatives have no political or legal right to vote on them until Proponents have duly qualified them for the ballot in the manner provided by law, free from the taint of fraud. Thus, this decision does not preclude Proponents from fairly and lawfully qualifying the initiatives for a vote of the people on the merits in the next election cycle." Appeal The case has been appealed to the Montana Supreme Court - final briefs were due October 3, 2006. Appellants/Proponents Brief Respondents/Opponents Brief Respondents/State Brief Respondents/State Motion to Supplement Record Appellants/Proponents Opposition to Motion to Supplement Record Order Denying Motion to Supplement Record Appellants/Proponents Reply Brief The initiatives remain on the ballot. Vote & Just Say NO to CI-98, CI-97 and I-154