Case: Ohioans for Raising the Wage v. Larose

COVID-19 summary: On March 30, members of Ohioans for Raising the Wage filed a complaint and motion for a preliminary injunction against the Ohio Secretary of State. The plaintiffs sought to suspend the required number of signatures required to qualify for the ballot in Ohio. The motion for preliminary injunction was denied on April 28, and the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the case the next day.

On March 30, members of Ohioans for Raising the Wage, a ballot issue committee in support of a petition effort for the passage of a constitutional amendment to raise wages to $13 per hour by 2025 in Ohio, filed a complaint and motion for a preliminary injunction against the Ohio Secretary of State, Frank Larose.

The group had collected 73,968 signatures for the petition as of March 12, the date an order prohibiting large gatherings was issued. Since then, the COVID-19 pandemic significantly reduced the number of signatures they were able to collect. Therefore, the plaintiffs argued that the requirements were “unduly burdensome . . . in light of the COVID-19 public health crisis” and therefore violated the Ohio constitutional rights rights of speech, association and ballot access.

Represented by private attorneys, the plaintiffs sought preliminary and permanent injunctive relief under state law. Specifically, the plaintiffs sought to suspend the required number of signatures, which was 442,958 statewide or 10% of total votes, to 6% of the number of electors that voted in the 2018 gubernatorial elections, which amounts to 265,774 signatures. They also sought to extend the deadline to submit the signatures from July 1 to August 21. The case was assigned to Judge David C. Young.

On March 31, the Ohioans for Secure and Fair Elections sought to intervene as plaintiffs in the case, represented by the American Civil Liberties Foundation and the ACLU of Ohio. The same day, they filed an intervenor’s motion for a preliminary injunction.

The defendant moved to dismiss the case on April 27.

On April 28, the plaintiff’s request for a preliminary injunction was denied. Judge David C. Young found that despite the unique situation presented, the “constitutional language does not include an exception for extraordinary circumstances or public health emergencies.” On April 29, the plaintiff filed a voluntary dismissal and on April 30, the intervening plaintiffs also voluntarily dismissed the case.